After much bickering and a simmering culture war, the national curriculum draft is set to be revised, with a greater role for the study of Western and Christian civilisation in the history classroom.
According to reports in The Sydney Morning Herald, a new draft to be considered by state education ministers this afternoon will cancel references to the Anzac legend as being “contested” after months of pressure from Alan Tudge, the education minister who is stood down over an alleged abusive relationship.
The latest draft comes after a long and fraught process to “refine and reduce” the content in the national curriculum, which kicked off in mid-2020.
The Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority released a draft curriculum last year, with a public consultation period to follow. A final version is expected this year.
From the outset, the curriculum made a powerful enemy in Tudge. While some concerns about the draft were more pedagogic — NSW had worries about the maths syllabus, for example — Tudge’s critiques have largely focused on the teaching of history.
Writing after the draft’s release, Tudge stressed that although the curriculum’s heightened focus on Indigenous history was important, “it should not come at the expense of the teaching of classical and Western civilisations”.
Tudge has sharpened that pure culture war attack ever since. Writing in The Australian, he claimed the history curriculum had a “negative view” of Australia, “almost erased Christianity from our past” and suggested “nothing bad happened before 1788 and nothing good happened since”.
In a spicy interview with Triple J’s Hack program, Tudge attacked the idea that Anzac Day would be contested, arguing it should be presented to students as “the most sacred of all days”. Teaching otherwise, he implied, would mean students would be reluctant to “protect” Australia.
Late last year, Labor states hit back at Tudge’s comments; Victorian Education Minister James Merlino accused him of trying to “incite culture wars”. There were concerns Tudge was trying to pressure the curriculum authority. While he was (and may again be) the federal minister responsible, state and territory governments must agree to the draft.
Tudge’s attacks on the history curriculum aren’t new terrain for a Liberal government. As prime minister, John Howard frequently hit out at what he termed the “black armband” view of Australian history. After the Liberals returned to power in 2013, the Abbott government swiftly promised a review into Julia Gillard’s national curriculum, promising to rid it of “partisan bias” and ensuring Australia and the Anzacs were sufficiently celebrated.
Last year Pauline Hanson passed a Senate motion, with support from the government, calling for critical race theory to be rejected from the national curriculum. It was entirely symbolic — the curriculum says nothing about critical race theory.
The fight against the national curriculum has also excited conservative activist groups. As Crikey reported last year, the Institute of Public Affairs and Advance Australia put together a document on the “seven ways the Australian curriculum will impact your kids” which claimed the curriculum would turn children into left-wing activists. Conservative faith groups also attacked it.
Arguments from the conservative fringe about indoctrination through history curriculum got their run after dark on Sky News, and were later repeated on more legitimate media, and in major speeches, by the minister.
And while the most recent changes might not go far enough to satisfy Tudge, a re-emphasis on Western civilisation gives the government a very minor win in a new history war.
Should the Liberals just leave the history curriculum alone? Let us know your thoughts by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name if you would like to be considered for publication in Crikey’s Your Say column. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.
This is the world we live in, where examining different perceptions of historical events becomes an act of left-wing activism.
Hang on, aren’t the people railing against teaching a critical approach to history the same people whose supporters are out there chanting for “freedom” and rejecting the science on everything from climate change to covid vaccines? So – I’m trying to understand this – am I a better Australian if I question the orthodoxy, or not? No wonder the Government can’t govern.
I’m going to spend the weekend thinking about how I can influence the curriculum to produce more left-wing activists. God knows we could do with some more of them to counter the stodgy dodgy right-wing conservatism we get from this mob.Tudge and his ilk are straight-out dangerous for civil society.
Oh, and there’s nothing particularly civilised about Western Civilisation. But you’d have to read some history to figure that out.
The great Dutch historian Pieter Geyl once wrote that “history is an argument without end”. All history is contested, as far as meanings and interpretations are concerned.
Now remind me again what Gandhi said about Western Civilisation… oh yes, that’s right. It would be a really good idea.
The LNP’s view of the world is racist, in my view. They still believe in the British Empire. We should look beyond “Western Civilisation”.
So the ‘new’ slogan is Advance Australia Backwards.