Teachers suffering “reform fatigue” will be disheartened and demoralised by hasty changes to the national school curriculum, educators have told a review ordered by the Abbott government.



In January the education minister, Christopher Pyne, commissioned two critics of the national curriculum to conduct the Coalition’s promised review, partly to address claims that it downplayed the benefits of western civilisation and the importance of Anzac Day.

The conservative education commentator Kevin Donnelly and the public policy academic Ken Wiltshire were due to provide the government an interim report on Monday, but it is not expected to be released before the midyear completion deadline.

In a submission, the University of Queensland’s school of education argued the review was “compromised by its short time frame, limited representation of educational and discipline expertise amongst the review committee, and lack of available data on the effectiveness of its implementation”.

The school said there was clear international evidence that reforms leading to improved educational performance depended on focus, persistence and capacity-building. Teachers were already experiencing “reform fatigue” as a result of the constant pace of curriculum change.

“Teachers become disheartened, and then cynical, when there are unclear messages about why a new curriculum is beneficial for students’ learning,” the head of the school of education, Merrilyn Goos, wrote in a submission backed by eight colleagues.

“Applying these ideas to national curriculum reform such as we are currently experiencing in Australia highlights the need for time and support to be provided to everyone involved in the implementation – especially teachers. A hasty review before there is time for thorough trialling of curriculum documents is demoralising for those who are responsible for development and implementation.”

Jane Hunter, a specialist in curriculum and pedagogy at the University of Western Sydney’s school of education, warned the government against tinkering with the curriculum, saying it would “come at the expense of the ever-diminishing bucket of teacher morale”.

“I write to you from the perspective of being a teacher, an academic and researcher in teacher education for the past 25 years,” Hunter said in a submission.

“The review is not necessary at this time. I say not necessary because many schools, teachers, parents and principals have already commenced development and implementation of the Australian curriculum.

“The work already completed has required hours of time both in and out of school. When politics gets in the way of the work of schools it is often not helpful. This is again, under minister Pyne, one such case.”

Hunter said the announcement of the review destabilised education and sent a message to schools that what they did could not be trusted.

The Australian Literacy Educators’ Association told the review that the constant call for a “back to basics” curriculum or a return to past models was “not a constructive way to nurture a profession striving to prepare students for the demands of the 21st century”.

It said any changes needed to be seen as an improvement of what was already in place “rather than another overhaul, as teachers will lose energy, confidence and trust”.

The Australian Association for the Teaching of English wrote: “Too much change in too short a period in fact militates against real improvement in teaching practice and potential student learning achievement because is an unproductive distraction from the important business of quality teaching.”

Eileen Honan, a senior lecturer at the University of Queensland’s school of education, said the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (Acara) had been “transparent and open” in its curriculum development process.

Honan said she was one of the many academics and teachers who were part of the consultation over the development of the foundation to year 10 English curriculum. She said advisory group members were leading professionals in literacy and English.

The timing of the review precluded any serious attempt to evaluate the success of the implementation of the curriculum, Honan said.

“Anecdotal evidence from community members or individual teachers that may provide some support for change cannot be seriously considered without the backing of more systemic, rigorous data collection conducted by academic researchers with a depth and breadth of experience in large-scale social science research,” she said in her submission.

The Greens’ spokeswoman on school education, Penny Wright, called on Pyne to release the interim report.

“For transparency’s sake, it’s crucial that the public has access to this information about any proposed changes to the Australian curriculum. But I'm not optimistic, given that the review process has not been very transparent or open,” Wright said.

Earlier on Tuesday, Pyne said the government was focused on “putting students first by improving the national curriculum, examining how to ensure our teachers have world’s best training and increasing school autonomy and parental engagement”.

The review will look at the existing cross-curriculum priorities: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories and cultures; Asia and Australia’s engagement with Asia; sustainability. Christian Schools Australia, which represents 130 schools, has used its submission to call for the addition of an additional “western/Judeo-Christian” influence category to these priorities.