Christopher Pyne tackles leftist 'bias' in classrooms

THE Abbott government will move today to reshape school education by appointing strong critics of the national curriculum to review what children are taught, amid fears a "cultural Left" agenda is failing students.

The Education Minister, Christopher Pyne, is seeking a blueprint by mid-year to overhaul the curriculum, warning that the rise of "remedial" classes at universities proves the depths of the problem in Australian classrooms. Vowing to restore an "orthodox" curriculum, Mr Pyne will today name author and former teacher Kevin Donnelly and business professor Ken Wiltshire to lead the review.

The appointments clear the way for reforms that could expunge parts of the history syllabus that Tony Abbott has blasted for favouring Labor and the unions but glossing over the work of Coalition prime ministers.

Mr Donnelly is a fierce critic of the "relativism" in the teaching program, while Professor Wiltshire has rejected the emphasis on "competencies" and urged a sharper focus on knowledge and assessment.

The looming changes could spark another "culture war", given past brawls, including John Howard's criticism in 2007 of the "shameful" neglect of Australian history and the disputes over Julia Gillard's introduction of the national curriculum in 2010.

Writing in The Australian today, Mr Pyne declares that parents want a curriculum that is "free of partisan bias" and deals with real-world issues.

Concerns about the teaching program have deepened in recent years as the nation lost ground in global assessments of reading, maths and science, putting Australian students behind their counterparts in Vietnam, Poland and Estonia. Canberra and the states agreed on changes to the curriculum last year but the new review throws open the debate to the public, allowing for wider consultation and possibly the holding of open hearings.

Mr Pyne said he expected the states to accept the need for change, given signs of the problems with the current curriculum.

"I think the fact that universities are teaching maths and English remedial courses is a symptom of an education system that isn't meeting the needs of students who go on to university, and that's something the reviewers will be taking a close look at," Mr Pyne said. "The term 'remedial' implies a remedy for a problem and one of the priorities for all governments should be removing the problem."

A key complaint about the curriculum is its emphasis on seven "general capabilities" rather than essential knowledge in fields such as maths, English and history.

Former History Teachers Association president Paul Kiem has warned that this led to a "tick a box" approach to teaching a subject. A similar view was put by NSW Board of Studies president Tom Alegounarias.

Mr Donnelly, a regular contributor to The Australian, has warned against a "subjective" view of culture that neglects the Judeo-Christian values at the core of Australian institutions.

He has also savaged a civics curriculum that teaches that "citizenship means different things to different people at different times", rather than preparing students for an understanding of their responsibilities. "The civics curriculum argues in favour of a post-modern, deconstructed definition of citizenship," he wrote last year.

"The flaws are manifest. What right do Australians have to expect migrants to accept our laws, institutions and way of life?

"Such a subjective view of citizenship allows Islamic fundamentalists to justify mistreating women and carrying out jihad against non-believers."

Mandating a "cultural left national curriculum" would fail students, he wrote.

Professor Wiltshire branded the curriculum a "failure" last January - prior to changes that were put in place last year.

"A school curriculum should be based on a set of values, yet it is almost impossible to determine what values have been explicitly used to design the proposed model," he wrote of the changes under the Gillard government.

"Curriculum should also be knowledge-based, yet we are faced with an experiment that focuses on process or competencies."

Professor Wiltshire also attacked the "astounding devaluation of the book" in modern teaching.

In his outline of the changes, Mr Pyne points to complaints that history classes are not recognising the legacy of Western civilisation and not giving enough prominence to big events in Australian history such as Anzac Day.

Mr Pyne told The Australian yesterday he "most definitely" stood by his past criticisms of the curriculum, including its neglect of business and commerce in the country's history.

"I believe the curriculum should be orthodox and should tell students about where we've come from and why we are the country we are today, so we can shape our future appropriately," he said.

He said he supported the "unvarnished truth" in the curriculum on everything from the treatment of indigenous Australians to political history. "There is little place in a curriculum for elevating relativism over the truth."

Deals with the states are a key factor in the plan after The Australian reported last month that some state education ministers had challenged Mr Pyne over his "command-and-control" approach to the teaching program.

The ministerial talks were held amid the heated debate over the government's shifting position on a $1.2 billion outlay on the Gonski education reforms.

Mr Pyne told The Australian there was a "moral suasion" to improving the teaching program.

"The states, I am sure, would want to implement the best curriculum without a financial incentive to do so," he said.

The current curriculum has three priorities across subjects - indigenous culture, Asia and sustainability - but Mr Pyne questioned their merits.

"It's difficult to see in maths and science how those three themes are necessarily relevant," he said in an interview. "Themes should not be elevated above a robust curriculum."