Australian Federal Election 2016: genes are destiny excuse

Journalist Jennifer Oriel in The Australian on 11 April 2016, putting the case for a two-tiered national education system where public schools and their 'dumb' students living in comparative poverty are offered less opportunity because genetics are allegedly destiny:

More punitive taxes and big spender social programs in education and health are central pillars of ALP plans for fiscal repair. The former is aimed at reducing the deficit Labor increased by squandering the proceeds of the mining boom. It wasted billions on cash splashes and social programs that have failed to achieve stated policy goals in improving educational and social outcomes. Now the party needs a scapegoat. The politics of envy provides an endless supply…..

Whether the object of envy is intelligence, talent, beauty, status or wealth, there is always a group that feels entitled to what nature or nurture did not provide. If they cannot take the envied trait or property by force, the envious seek to deride those who bear it.

As a unifying political device, the emotion of envy has few equals. In Australia, it finds social form in the tall poppy syndrome. Visitors to Australia long have remarked upon the darker side envy amplifies in our national character.….

Modern Labor began its campaign against Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull by sowing envy about his wealth and international investments. But the collective envy required to justify a circular regimen of Keynesian redistribution demands a collective target and policy goals that are always just out of reach, either because they are unattainable or conveniently unquantifiable. Equality of outcome is the substantive socialist solution.

While liberals support equal opportunity and formal equality, socialists engineer equality of outcome through policy prescriptions increasingly at odds with science. Labor’s education policy is a case in point. In a letter to school principals last week, Bill Shorten committed to redressing inequality by promising money the government doesn’t have to fund Gonski education reforms. Despite the sound aim of improving the educational outcomes of all children, at a cost of $37.3 billion, delivering the Gonksi policy through government inflicts a heavy toll on the taxpayer with doubtful return on investment. Numerous private companies provide high efficacy literacy and numeracy programs while decades of government-run interventions have had little impact in levelling educational outcomes. And recent research indicates the Gonski reform package, like numerous social programs before it, is unlikely to succeed.

Despite Labor’s education revolution and promises of substantive equality, vast differences in educational outcomes continue. The most recent research suggests a reason for inequality of educational attainment that should provoke a rethink of social and economic policy. Speaking on SBS’s Insight program, Brian Byrne of the University of New England revealed findings of soon to be published research with colleagues at the Centre of Excellence for Cognition and its Disorders. It indicates that genes are the most important determinant of maths and reading skills among schoolchildren. Their study of twins’ NAPLAN performance apparently found that maths, reading and spelling skills are up to 75 per cent genetic and writing skills are about 50 per cent genetic. The influence of schools and teachers, the focus of Labor’s policies, accounts for only about 5 per cent of performance.

Social psychologist Richard Nisbett was more hopeful in his assessment of the nature versus nurture debate in education. In Intelligence and How to Get It, he analyses research on various interventions to improve the educational outcomes of children from poor backgrounds. Some appeared promising, but many had only a modest impact whose effect diminished.

Recent research suggesting academic performance is substantially heritable challenges existing literature in which academics and politicians extol the benefits of government interventions to redress educational inequality. But it could be used constructively to drive policy reforms that provide greater choice in school and university education to cater to inborn differences…… [my red bolding]

There we have it in a nutshell - genes are destiny, a second-tier education system is advisable and anyone who suggests otherwise is suffering from pathological envy.

However, the journalist wasn't being as honest as possible concerning the views of Emeritus Professor Brian Byrne.

Here are two quotes from the answers he gave the Insight program moderator when questioned about that international twin study, which included twins from the Sydney area:

JENNY BROCKIE: This is what's genetic, what's inherited? 

PROFESSOR BRYAN BYRNE: What's genetic, for the NAPLAN varies between about 50 and 75 percent of the differences amongst children's performance can be traced back to genetic differences which leaves a fair bit for the environment…..

JENNY BROCKIE: And genes aren't destiny Bryan we need to make that very clear? 

PROFESSOR BRYAN BYRNE: That's right. 

Nor does the journalist specifically mention that Professor Dr. Richard Nisbett has formed a view that genetics matters less than differences in family environment and culture when it comes to intelligence and educational outcomes.

Homophobia rules in the Christensen universe

Photograph from The Sydney Morning Herald, 26 February 2016

George Christensen (Dawson, Liberal Party) Australian House of Representatives Hansard, 25 February 2016  via Open Australia:

I rise as a voice for the thousands of parents who have been shocked when they discovered how the ironically named Safe Schools program is indoctrinating their children. When those parents consider just how unsafe this program is, they will wonder why the federal government is allowing it to be implemented in schools, much less spending $8 million of taxpayer money to fund it.

The things that the Safe Schools Coalition Australia are recommending to school students include pornographic web content, sex shops, adult online communities and sex clubs. The Safe Schools 'All of Us' teaching resource directs students to the LGBT organisation Twenty10. On 19 January this year, Twenty10 hosted a hands-on workshop for youth on sex toys and sadomasochistic practices. All of Us also directs students to the website of the LGBT youth organisation Minus18, which produced most of the Safe Schools resources. Minus18 advised the students on chest binding, penis tucking, sex toys and sex advice such as 'penis-in-vagina sex is not the only sex and certainly not the ultimate sex'.

Minus18 links to The Tool Shed—an online pornographic sex shop offering a range of sex toys, sadomasochistic items and pornography. Minus18 recommends Scarleteen—a teen sex advice site that promotes group sex, sex toys and sadomasochism. Minus18 is an event partner with Melbourne gay bar the GH Hotel, which features erotic homosexual entertainment.

Safe Schools recommends the transgender organisation Seahorse Club Victoria, which in turn recommends the Abode fetish club. Abode is located at the same address as The Parlour Lounge sex club, which provides sadomasochistic entertainment and rooms for sex.

Safe Schools is funded via the Foundation for Young Australians, whose partner agencies implement the Safe Schools program. New South Wales partner Family Planning NSW offers detailed information on oral sex. Tasmanian partner Working It Out recommends YouTube channels featuring such things as 'Gay guy sees first transgender vagina' and 'Anal for FTMs'.

These links to sexually explicit web content and external organisations of an adult or erotic nature raise serious concerns about child safety. Further, Safe Schools provides instructions to children on how to hide their internet browsing history. It advises them to ask for restricted websites that are blocked at school—and would be blocked at home—to be unblocked by their teachers without parental knowledge.

If parents knew their children were being exposed to this type of material, they would probably not let them go to school. If someone proposed exposing a child to this material, the parents would probably call the police because it sounds a lot like the grooming work that a sexual predator might undertake. Child and Adolescent Sexual Assault Counselling Incorporated is a New South Wales peak body for child sexual assault counselling. This is how that body describes the process of grooming:

Sexualisation of the relationship through conversation and exposure of the child to sexual material such as images; taking undue interest in the child's sexual development; assuring the child of the rightness of what they are doing; telling the child the acts will not hurt them; alienating the child from their parents and family so that they do not feel close to them; and shaping the child's sexual preferences and manipulating what the child finds exciting.

That all sounds very familiar. The Safe Schools program focuses heavily on child and teenage sexual activity and sexual attractions; justifies almost any sexual activity; diminishes possible risks and harms; encourages young people to hide their activities from their parents; and provides links to adult sex clubs, adult online communities and sex shops. What is more, the program portrays all of this as normal and wraps it up in a taxpayer funded package and calls it an anti-bullying campaign. The Safe Schools program is in fact an unsafe schools program and it leaves students open to being groomed on websites advertising adult sex venues.

I commend the government for undertaking a review of this program and I call on schools using this program to immediately suspend it pending the outcome of that review. I urge all members of this House, particularly those with young children, to take a close look at what Safe Schools is delivering. I seek leave to table two documents—a diagram and an explanatory sheet illustrating the external links of the Safe Schools campaign.

Leave granted.

Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott just demolished one of his latest reasons for proposing deregulation of university fees

This was Prime Minister Tony Abbott being quoted in The Australian on 14 March 2015 concerning his desire to deregulate university fees:

Mr Abbott said just one Australian university was now ranked in the world’s top 50.

“Why not try to get two in the top 20. Unless we take the dead hand of Canberra away that is going to be extremely difficult,” he said.

It seems Mr. Abbott has either not bothered to research the issue and relied on a single recent newspaper report or he is just making things up again because he knows News Corp media is not going to challenge the nonsense he spouts.

The 2014-15 Times Higher Education world university rankings survey (covering 400 universities) lists five Australian universities in the top 100 and two, I repeat two, in the top 50 universities.

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2014-15/world-ranking

In which Australian Education Minister Christopher Pyne's nose grows longer and longer.....

The Australian depiction of Christopher Pyne and his deregulated university course fees

This was the Australian Education Minister Christopher Pyne being interviewed by The Insiders program on 15 March 2015:

Labor of course are the only reason why the crossbenchers are where the action is because Labor's taken themselves out of the conversation by being political opportunists, except of course we now see that they represent an existential threat to universities because of Kim Carr's policy of putting caps back on, paying on outcomes and shutting out low socioeconomic status students from university.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics Education and Work, Australia, May 2014 clearly states that:

Of those engaged in formal study, approximately 1.2 million (40%) were attending a higher education institution….

More than one third (39%) of people aged 15–64 years who were enrolled in a non-school qualification were studying for a Bachelor Degree….

Leaving aside the fact that is was past Labor federal governments which introduced first free university education then later low, no-interest loans to meet the shortfall between government funding of university places and course costs and, even adjusting this attendance figure for overseas students studying in this country, that still leaves an est. 1 million domestic university students of which an est 17.5% are from low socio-economic backgrounds.

In fact, the reason that the percentage stands nationally at an est. 17.5 is because the former Gillard Labor Government uncapped Commonwealth supported student places at Australian universities under the demand-driven system in 2012 and, this led to an immediate 0.5% enrolment increase within twelve months of low socio-economic students [Socio-economic Status of Schools and University Academic Performance: Implications for Australia’s Higher Education Expansion, December 2014]

Some universities can now boast 20% or more students from low-income family backgrounds.

When comparing the percentage of such students in the final years of the Gillard Government with percentages during the Howard Coalition Government, it is clear that numbers being admitted to university from this group were lower during the Howard years – in the first three years the percentage never rose above 14.7% [Socioeconomic Background and Higher Education Participation, 2002] and didn’t reach 16% until the early 2000s.

Mr. Pyne appears to have offered up his strange claims to voters before this.

As Labor’s higher education policy, the Shadow Minister for Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Industry Kim Carr pointed out at a Universities Australia conference on 12 March 2015.

The Minister and some supporters of deregulation have chosen to wilfully misinterpret my past remarks as a signal that Labor intends to impose an enrolment freeze.

Let me categorically reject that claim.

Mr Pyne’s so-called analysis of these claims is based on a lie.

Under Labor, the number of student places will continue to grow. Under Labor, universities will be properly funded.

So how much have Abbott and Pyne spent on finding ways to convince voters that creating an unfair barrier to higher education for the working class is OK?

AusTender snapshot 29 November 2014:

It seems that once Federal Government politicians swan off for the December to February 2015 parliamentary holiday break, their backroom boys may not be enjoying quite such extended rest as they may have to return to their desks in order to delve into the $149.8k of data supplied by Orima Research.

Looking for ways to bombard unsuspecting voters with propaganda, advertising, 

information which attempts to convince them that higher education access and equity is not really an issue for their children, women in general and all low income families under Abbott & Pyne's unfair and unpopular tertiary education reform agenda.

And an advertising blitz is all that is left to the Abbott Government in the new year as the Senate voted down its higher education changes 33 to 31 on 2 December 2014.

OVERCOMING INDIGENOUS DISADVANTAGE 2014 report released 19 November 2014

M e d i a R e l e a s e

Wednesday 19 November 2014

Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision

OVERCOMING INDIGENOUS DISADVANTAGE 2014

The 2014 Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage (OID) report released today shows some positive trends in the wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, with improvements in health, education

and economic outcomes. However, results in areas such as justice and mental health continue to cause concern.

The report shows that, nationally, for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians:

• economic outcomes have improved over the longer term, with higher incomes, lower reliance on income support, increased home ownership, and higher rates of full time and professional employment.

However, improvements have slowed in recent years

• several health outcomes have improved, including increased life expectancy and lower child mortality.

However, rates of disability and chronic disease remain high, mental health outcomes have not improved, and hospitalisation rates for self-harm have increased

• post-secondary education outcomes have improved, but there has been virtually no change in literacy and numeracy results at school, which are particularly poor in remote areas

• justice outcomes continue to decline, with adult imprisonment rates worsening and no change in high rates of juvenile detention and family and community violence.

“It has been almost three years since the last OID report. For this report we made a concerted effort to increase the involvement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. Their input contributed to significant developments, including broadening the focus from overcoming disadvantage to improving wellbeing, and the inclusion of new indicators, such as Indigenous language revitalisation and maintenance, valuing Indigenous cultures (including experiences of racism and discrimination) and participation in decision making” said Peter Harris, chairman of the Productivity Commission and of the Steering Committee.

The OID report is the most comprehensive report on Indigenous wellbeing produced in Australia. It contains accessible data for an extensive range of wellbeing measures as well as case studies of programs that have led to improved outcomes. “This report should be compulsory reading for anyone interested in outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians or working in service delivery or program design,” said Commissioner Patricia Scott, who convenes the expert working group that advises on the report.

The report is a product of the Review of Government Service Provision. It is overseen by a Steering Committee comprising senior officials from the Australian, State and Territory governments, and supported by a secretariat from the Productivity Commission. This report is the sixth in the series, which traces its origins to the final report of the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation in 2000.

The full report can be found here.

On the same day the Productivity Commission report was released the Abbott Government walked away from another one of its 2013 election promises, according to The Australian, 20 November 2014:

THE national peak body for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Legal Services NATSILS is angry at the Abbott government for “back flipping” on a pledge to consider introducing justice targets as part of the Closing the Gap policy agenda, a move which NATSILS along with many other Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leaders and organisations have long called for.

It comes after this week’s Productivity Commission Overcoming indigenous Disadvantage report revealed a shocking increase of nearly 60 per cent in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander incarceration rates over the last decade.

NATSILS Chairperson, Shane Duffy, said that confirmation from the Minister for indigenous Affairs, Nigel Scullion, during question time in the Senate on Wednesday that the government would not be progressing with introducing a justice target, despite publicly supporting such in the lead up to the 2013 election, was a troubling development…..

Mr Duffy said that the development of Closing the Gap justice targets was not just about throwing more money at the issue, as the Minister had described it, but was rather about getting the policy settings right to affect real change and to make sure resources in the justice space are used most effectively.

“The high cost of incarceration combined with the fact that prisons actually offer little in terms of effective rehabilitation, means that addressing incarceration rates should be an economic priority for the Government and its budget bottom line,” Mr Duffy said.

“It is costing Australian taxpayers more than $795 million per annum just to maintain the current level of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander over-imprisonment, so to reiterate the sentiments of the Minister in recent days, we shouldn’t just keep throwing money down the drain.”

Turning state school students into good little Christians in Abbott's Australia

Not content with circumventing a High Court of Australia ruling and forcing exclusively religion-based counsellors into the secular state school system, now Prime Minister Tony Abbott and his merry band of mindless ideologues are intent on revising the national education curriculum to place more emphasis on morals, values and spirituality and to better recognise the country’s Judeo-Christian heritage.

Proof that Christianity is a prominent focus can be found in the 2014 final report of the ‘independent’ two-man committee (comprising ex-Liberal Party staffer and lobbyist Kevin Donnelly & professor of public administration and Abbott supporter Keith Wiltshire) tasked with reviewing the education curriculum - with its sixty-three mentions of this religion and/or Judeo-Christian heritage.

The Australian published this potted outline on 13 October 2014 for readers who may not be inclined to wade through the report:

One day after the final report was released Abbott was quoted in The Newcastle Herald publicly support the reviewer’s final recommendations:

PRIME Minister Tony Abbott believes sending schools back to basics, as recommended in the national curriculum review, will boost the economy and students' job prospects.

"My comments get on the tellie - yours don't. You can't be heard!

YouTube may not be the tellie, however it records the Australian Education Minister Christopher Pyne for posterity just the same....

http://youtu.be/xt7CxXh5nQw

Has 'Captain Catholic' and his merry band of Christian fascisti finally wrecked a proud tradition of secular public education in Australia?

The Sydney Morning Herald 27 August 2014:

The Abbott government is pushing ahead with a religious-only school chaplaincy scheme following a cabinet debate over whether secular welfare workers should be included in the program.

The government was forced to redesign the $224 million scheme after the High Court ruled it invalid in June for the second time in two years. The court found the Commonwealth had over-reached its funding powers by providing direct payments to chaplain providers.

In a bid to prevent another High Court challenge, the federal government will provide funding to state and territory governments to administer the scheme. This new arrangement strengthens the hand of the states and could see some demand an option for secular welfare workers or tougher qualification standards.

In a cabinet meeting on Monday, Abbott government ministers explored options to extend the scheme to include funding for secular welfare workers. This would have reversed the government's existing policy that funding should be restricted to religious chaplains. 

During the cabinet discussion, Mr Abbott argued that the government should stand by its existing policy. Mr Abbott argued the scheme's original intent was supporting pastoral care in schools and that should remain its focus….

The chaplaincy scheme was introduced by the Howard government in 2006. Labor expanded the scheme to include funding for secular welfare workers in 2011 – an option the government scrapped in this year's budget.

Both challenges in the High Court were brought forward by Toowoomba father Ron Williams, a secularist opposed to public funding for religious workers in public schools.

The government rushed forward its announcement about the new scheme on Wednesday afternoon after Fairfax Media revealed the story online. The government had hoped to avoid a distracting debate on chaplains during the introduction of its sweeping higher education changes into Parliament on Thursday.

Well worth repeating: The Age editorial 'Playing Games With Religion In Schools'

Playing games with religion in schools

Date August 1, 2014

The ancient book of Ecclesiastes teaches that there is a time and a place for everything. A time to be silent and a time to speak. There is also a time to pray, if that is what is needed. Whether there is a time and place for students to pray during school lunchtimes, however, is a matter that clearly causes some people enormous concern.

After state Education Minister Martin Dixon issued a ministerial direction about the rules and procedures governing the provision of special religious instruction in government schools, a cry erupted among some Christian groups claiming the rules encroach on basic human rights. Opponents of the directive say it amounts to an attack on religious freedom and free speech, and that it is a step towards outright bans on prayer in schools.

Their rhetoric is inflammatory, and their concerns are misplaced. The government is not banning prayer in school. It is not forbidding students to pray at lunchtime, if that is what they want to do with their meal break. It is saying that prayer forums ''cannot be led'' by teachers or other school staff, by parents, volunteers or visitors. Put another way, if there are prayer groups or meetings of student religious clubs during school hours, then they must not take the form of ''instructed'' prayer. That is a world away from imposing draconian curbs on the rights to religious freedom and free speech.

The rationale is simple. Government schools are secular environments and their primary aim is education. It has been that way since the Education Act of 1872 formalised that public education in this state should be free, secular and compulsory. In 1958, the law was amended to provide an exception allowing non-compulsory religious instruction classes to be held within schools, but on certain conditions and only by accredited providers. It should be noted the law does not bar religious instruction classes being held on state school grounds outside school hours.

The 2006 education legislation states that schools must ''not promote any particular religious practice, denomination or sect'', but it nevertheless allows schools to provide classes of special religious instruction during school hours, only by accredited representatives. To allow non-accredited instructors to supervise religious sessions at lunchtime would be to subvert the system entirely. Mr Dixon's directive provides a framework for schools to ensure they are abiding by the law and not inadvertently providing non-accredited religious instruction classes.

The Age has consistently argued that beyond reading, writing and arithmetic, there is room in schools for the study of the various belief systems and for informed and informative discussion about ethical choices. Education about religion should provide students with sound information about belief structures and religious practices that help shape our world, as well as provide historical context to the role played by religion in our world. A byproduct of all that might be greater social awareness and enhanced tolerance of diversity.

That does not, however, justify a state-backed religious agenda in education. A secular school system should not impose proselytising nor actively sponsor it. If religious instruction is to be conducted at all within the secular school environment, then there must be clear boundaries and rules. Where state schools do provide special classes in religious instruction, who teaches it, how, and when it is provided should all be carefully managed.

Nothing bars students from organising their own religious groups at school; they are not impeded in practising their religion at school. Their fundamental rights are preserved. At the same time, the resources and facilities of the state education system must be directed primarily to education for all

Although the directive mentioned in this editorial applies only to Victorian schools, the debate concerning religion in schools is nation-wide.

Australian Education Minister Called On To Dump Donnelly Now

Open Letter To Minister For Education published on 21 July 2014:

To The Hon Christopher Pyne
Monday 21 July, 2014
CC: Shadow Minster, The Hon Kate Ellis

Dear Minister,

In a recent interview to 2UE on 15th July Kevin Donnelly, Director of the Education Standards Institute, stated:

“If the school community is in favour of it [corporal punishment] then I have not got a problem if it’s done properly”

There is no doubt, given this interview, that Kevin Donnelly has no objection to the use of corporal punishment in schools.

This statement is a reckless and inappropriate endorsement of archaic attitudes and practices in relation to the discipline of children both in schools and society.

In a community where neglect and violence against children has been on the increase, corporal punishment must be seen as a totally inappropriate and ineffective behaviour management strategy for schools.

A National Summit, Behaviour in Australian Schools: Current trends and possibilities, was held in South Australia last week with the clear aim of raising the profile of children and their rights as students in schools.

The Summit brought together significant research on the complexity of behaviour in schools.

This research provides new insights into the ways schools can engage students in their learning and schooling while respecting their dignity, treating them fairly, and allowing and encouraging them to continue their education. It critiqued punitive responses to misbehaviour and offered alternatives.

It is upon this kind of evidence-based research that a senior educational advisor to the government should base his comments.

Harking back to community standards of more than 30 years ago has no relevance to the realities of today or 21st century community expectations.

The educational researchers and other participants involved in the Summit were disconcerted by the comments made by Kevin Donnelly, especially as he is a senior educational advisor to the Federal Education Minister. In this role, the Australian public has a right to expect informed commentary and advice based on sound research.

We call on the government to remove Mr Donnelly from his position as advisor on any matters related to the education of children in Australia.

We call on the government to amend legislation to ensure that the children of Australia are protected from all forms of corporal punishment in schools.

For communication on this matter please phone:

Dr Anna Sullivan 0402 965 844

Signed:
1. Dr Anna Sullivan
Senior Lecturer
School of Education
University of South Australia
 
And 181 others whose names and positions can be found here

'Three Mobs One River Learning Kit' won the promoting indigenous recognition category at the National Awards for Local Government

Clarence Valley Council CVC News media release*:

18 June 2014

Aboriginal Education project wins national award

A learning kit that was designed, produced and implemented entirely by the Aboriginal community in the Clarence Valley has taken out a major national local government award.

The ‘Three Mobs One River Learning Kit’ won the promoting indigenous recognition category at the National Awards for Local Government at the Great Hall in Parliament House, Canberra, last night.

Clarence Valley Mayor, Richie Williamson, who attended the ceremony with two of the driving forces behind the project – Beris Duroux and Joanne Randall – said it was fitting recognition for an inventive, inspiring and inclusive project.

“Projects like this help develop understanding between the indigenous and non-indigenous communities,” he said.

The Three Mobs One River Learning Kit started with the aim of engaging Aboriginal students and helping them extend their schooling to Year 12, but according to Ms Duroux, there have been many other spin-off benefits.

The program was developed by the three Aboriginal nations of the Clarence region – the Bundjalung, Gumbaynggirr and Yaegl nations – and involves verbal in-school presentations by Elders and community members, multi-media presentations and reflections, written materials such as poems and articles and a living library of film and audio recordings.

The initial target was to engage 280 people, including Aboriginal parents, carers, agencies and community members. That target was surpassed in three months and after 12 months more than 2700 community members had made a connection with the learning kit.

More than 100 story themes have been offered by Aboriginal people and have been tracked to key student learning areas. Fifty five community members and 14 Aboriginal organisations have made a commitment to in-school verbal presentations.

Twenty seven PowerPoint and verbal presentations have been developed by parents, and four film pieces, four sound records, and a set of donated documentation has been compiled.

Department of Education and Communities Aboriginal communities liaison officer, Beris Duroux, said the project would not have been possible without the support of the three Aboriginal nations of the Clarence and the wider community.

“Without the stories of the Aboriginal people, we wouldn’t have a project,” she said.

“This is all about our future and helping develop future leaders in our community.

“But it also helps other members of the community understand our stories and our history.”

The program is running at Maclean High School and Grafton and South Grafton high schools and McAuley Catholic College are expected to have it running soon.

Release ends.

* Since David Bancroft, former editor of The Daily Examiner, began to write these media releases the level of reliable information they contain and general quality has improved - well done, David.

Australian Liberal-National Politics 2014: you stupid, stupid men

Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott and Federal Education Minister Christopher Pyne demonstrate their abysmal intellectual and political stupidity in appointing Kevin Donnelly one of only  two individuals who will be reviewing the national curriculum from Foundation to Year 12.

Former teacher and ex-Liberal Party staffer Kevin Donnelly says Australian education has become too secular, and the federation's Judeo-Christian heritage should be better reflected in the curriculum. [http://ab.co/1d9CV5e, 11 January 2013]

It is no secret that Donnelly would like to return Australian education to a time when the teaching of history was little more than instilling the political and cultural myths of dominant elites into the minds of students.

His hostility to the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) and the current national curriculum is well known.

As to why religion is ignored, the answer is easy to find. In a report on the consultation process related to the curriculum, those responsible are content to argue, “The treatment of religion within the paper needs to be reviewed to include more reference to ‘non-religious’ views.”

The authors are also happy to embrace a politically-correct, postmodern view of society. Their belief is that Australia is “a secular nation with a multicultural and multi-faith society”, one that is “diverse and dynamic” and where students are taught to “value their own cultures, languages and beliefs”. [Dr Kevin Donnelly,8 June 2013,National curriculum's crusade against Christianity]

The history curriculum, in addition to uncritically promoting diversity and difference instead of what binds us a community and a nation, undervalues Western civilisation and the significance of Judeo-Christian values to our institutions and way of life. [Kevin Donnelly,29 October 2013,Our colonised classrooms]

While Donnelly’s fear of a factual history of Christianity as a political/social force (particularly the history of the Catholic Church) being taught to high school students is obvious:

In an early draft of the history curriculum, while “Christian” appeared once, there was no mention of Christianity. While the most recent document refers to Christianity a number of times (and once to the Catholic Church) the focus is very much on diversity, difference and cultural relativism. When Christianity is mentioned it is usually in the context of other religions (Hinduism, Judaism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Islam) and there is no attempt to detail the historical and cultural significance of Christianity. When studying ancient Rome, for example, students are asked to consider the rise of the Roman empire and the spread of religious beliefs, but there is no mention of Christianity. In the study of Medieval Europe, Christianity is included, but the stated aims, that students should learn about “the dominance of the Catholic Church and the role of significant individuals such as Charlemagne”, “the Church’s power in terms of wealth and labour” and “the nature and power of the Church in this period”, indicate that students will be left with a less than favourable impression. [Kevin Donnelly,1 March 2011, A Back-to-Nonsense Curriculum]

Donnelly seems to have a long personal history of pushing ultra-conservative, religion-based views and resisting the concept of an inclusive society.

Dr Donnelly is the director of the Education Standards Institute, which his website states is the trading name for Impetus Consultants Pty Ltd, a business registered to the K Donnelly Family Trust.

In 2005, Amanda Vanstone told Parliament the Education Department had engaged Impetus Consultants to provide advice and services since 1996.

Ms Vanstone said Dr Donnelly had been paid $165,997 between 1997-2005 by the Howard government for consultant work....

Dr Donnelly wrote in 2011 for the ABC: ''Multiculturalism is based on the mistaken belief that all cultures are of equal worth and that it is unfair to discriminate and argue that some practices are wrong''.

In 2004, he wrote that ''many parents'' would consider homosexuality ''abnormal behaviour'', arguing: ''the reality is that gays, lesbians and same-sex couples with children are a very small minority and such groups do not represent the mainstream.''

He has also called for the Bible to be taught in state schools.  [The Sydney Morning Herald 12 January 2014]

Unfortunately Donnelly also appears to view the national curriculum and education as part of a wider political battleground:

the Cultural-left is dominant in areas like the ABC, the Fairfax Press, most of our universities and amongst our so-called public intellectuals. Listen to the news, read the papers or follow public debates and it soon becomes obvious that the consensus on most issues champions a Cultural-left perspective.

With the exception of the Murdoch Press, especially The Australian and commentators like Andrew Bolt, conservative authors and commentators like myself find it impossible to get an airing and, if we do, it is generally as the token spokesman from the ‘right’ selected to balance the other 2 or 3 hand chosen from the ‘left’. [Kevin Donnelly, Quadrant online,Education Standards Institute]

Donnelly's educational expertise is also called into question by past behaviour.

The education guru tasked with reforming Australia's national curriculum by the federal government was previously employed by tobacco firm Phillip Morris to design a school program teaching children about peer pressure and decision making that did not discuss the health dangers of smoking.

The material, which was given to more than 1500 children in Australia and New Zealand, instead encouraged students to make their own decisions about doing ''something wrong'' including smoking (later versions of the guide, including an Aboriginal version, included discussion of the harmful impacts of smoking).

On Friday, the material's author, Kevin Donnelly,.... [The Sydney Morning Herald 12 January 2014]

The Australian Medical Journal, “Below the Line”: The tobacco industry and youth smoking - in part a critique of Donnelly's school program.

The appointment of this two-man review body makes one suspect that both Abbott and Pyne are progressing their own personal religious agendas rather than creating policy for the national good.

Background

Who is Kevin Donnelly?

Who is Ken Wiltshire?

Support your local TAFE. Do your block from 11-17 November 2013

International Day of the Girl Child 2013

On December 19, 2011, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 66/170 to declare 11 October as the International Day of the Girl Child, to recognize girls’ rights and the unique challenges girls face around the world. For its second observance, this year’s Day will focus on “Innovating for Girls’ Education”.

The fulfilment of girls’ right to education is first and foremost an obligation and moral imperative. There is also overwhelming evidence that girls’ education, especially at the secondary level, is a powerful transformative force for societies and girls themselves: it is the one consistent positive determinant of practically every desired development outcome, from reductions in mortality and fertility, to poverty reduction and equitable growth, to social norm change and democratization.

While there has been significant progress in improving girls’ access to education over the last two decades, many girls, particularly the most marginalized, continue to be deprived of this basic right. Girls in many countries are still unable to attend school and complete their education due to safety-related, financial, institutional and cultural barriers. Even when girls are in school, perceived low returns from poor quality of education, low aspirations, or household chores and other responsibilities keep them from attending school or from achieving adequate learning outcomes. The transformative potential for girls and societies promised through girls’ education is yet to be realized. [United Nations 2013]

Australian Federal Election 2013: Tony Abbott rejects the idea of well-rounded and informed students?

The Australian 3 September 2013:

TONY Abbott has urged a rethink of the national history curriculum, saying it underplays the heritage of Western civilisation, gives too much focus to trade unions and overlooks conservative prime ministers.

The Opposition Leader said while he would not dictate changes, the Coalition believed it was "possible to do better" and was entitled to say "maybe you ought to have a rethink".

Asked whether the national curriculum had become "politicised" under Labor, Mr Abbott said it was "mostly" to do with history.

"Lack of references to our heritage, other than an indigenous heritage, too great a focus on issues which are the predominant concern of one side of politics," he said at the National Press Club in Canberra. "I think the unions are mentioned far more than business. I think there are a couple of Labor prime ministers who get a mention, from memory, not a single Coalition prime minister."....

Australian Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has a somewhat strange idea about the history curriculum which forms part of the national Foundation to Year 12 Australian Curriculum.

Rather like a modern American Tea Party 'patriot' he apparently wants a sanitized, markedly right-wing and white bread version of history to be taught in our schools.

This is what the national history curriculum actually covers between Years 6 and 12 in order to produce a well-rounded student:

The Year 6 curriculum moves from colonial Australia to the development of Australia as a nation, particularly after 1900. Students explore the factors that led to Federation and experiences of democracy and citizenship over time. Students understand the significance of Australia’s British heritage, the Westminster system, and other models that influenced the development of Australia’s system of government. Students learn about the way of life of people who migrated to Australia and their contributions to Australia’s economic and social development.

The Year 7 curriculum provides a study of history from the time of the earliest human communities to the end of the ancient period, approximately 60 000 BC (BCE) – c.650 AD (CE). It was a period defined by the development of cultural practices and organised societies. The study of the ancient world includes the discoveries (the remains of the past and what we know) and the mysteries (what we do not know) about this period of history, in a range of societies including Australia, Egypt, Greece, Rome, China and India.

The Year 8 curriculum provides study of history from the end of the ancient period to the beginning of the modern period, c.650 AD (CE) – 1750. This was when major civilisations around the world came into contact with each other. Social, economic, religious, and political beliefs were often challenged and significantly changed. It was the period when the modern world began to take shape.

The Year 9 curriculum provides a study of the history of the making of the modern world from 1750 to 1918. It was a period of industrialisation and rapid change in the ways people lived, worked and thought. It was an era of nationalism and imperialism, and the colonisation of Australia was part of the expansion of European power. The period culminated in World War I 1914-1918, the ‘war to end all wars’.

The Year 10 curriculum provides a study of the history of the modern world and Australia from 1918 to the present, with an emphasis on Australia in its global context. The twentieth century became a critical period in Australia’s social, cultural, economic and political development. The transformation of the modern world during a time of political turmoil, global conflict and international cooperation provides a necessary context for understanding Australia’s development, its place within the Asia-Pacific region, and its global standing.

In Years 11 and 12 the curriculum allows students to do in depth study of either  modern or ancient history.