Australia's 1988 Bicentennial: National History and Multiculturalism in the Primary School Curriculum
Saved in:
| Title: | Australia's 1988 Bicentennial: National History and Multiculturalism in the Primary School Curriculum |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Sharp, Heather |
| Source: | History of Education. 2012 41(3):405-421. |
| Availability: | Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 17 |
| Publication Date: | 2012 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Education Level: | Elementary Education |
| Descriptors: | National Curriculum, Cultural Pluralism, News Reporting, Foreign Countries, Social Studies, History Instruction, History, Course Descriptions, Political Influences, Role, Indigenous Populations |
| Geographic Terms: | Australia |
| DOI: | 10.1080/0046760X.2011.625557 |
| ISSN: | 0046-760X |
| Abstract: | As in many countries, such as Germany, Turkey, the United States and Japan the history/culture wars of the past two decades have increased public interest in what is taught in schools. This has resulted in rigorous debates in the general community, encouraged and sustained through regular media coverage. Partly as a response to this, History has been designated as a separate subject in the first wave of planning and implementation of the Australian National Curriculum. Two of the reasons for this include first, to recognise the importance of teaching historical skills as a distinct subject; and second there is an ongoing bipartisan political interest in privileging history disciplinary knowledge and content to ensure that national history narratives are taught to students. To contribute meaningfully towards the development and implementation of a National Curriculum, it is important to understand past curriculum constructions, so that the disciplinary knowledge and content of history remains independent, and not subsumed within current (or future) political trends. Based on examples of national history from the Queensland Social Studies syllabus and government endorsed sourcebooks in the lead-up to the 1988 Bicentennial of British colonisation of the Australian continent, this article examines the influence and role of multiculturalism in History teaching in primary schools. Particular attention is paid to Indigenous representations and British heritages, as an example of two groups that have often been represented as binaries to each other throughout Australian history. An analysis of the curriculum materials illuminates the differences between multiculturalism and history--highlighting how the two are merged at the expense of accurate historical knowledge and concepts, particularly in the area of national history. This study will demonstrate that as a result of the infiltration of multiculturalism into history content within the Social Studies curriculum, historical knowledge becomes silenced in the school curriculum--resulting in vague and sometimes historically inaccurate information being presented to students; and the privileging of certain types of multiculturalism. (Contains 3 figures and 45 footnotes.) |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2012 |
| Accession Number: | EJ968510 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwH2Kwyl3B3BES9469zwHEz8AAAA4TCB3gYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHQMIHNAgEAMIHHBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDJPvrBAzs9qD_uFCFQIBEICBmQ0V005u2eBFcRq0MyTApbrNxQPqFgQ7QrNYY3Dc_skyP7lrFZEAXRv951jQ9IYAVavgPuPUpLrkwm7RqzrwATsmlx2baPCGaM8SJK2mweBe13XjS0vWWiNLBJjm_t4AucGtwZcQrEsBpaTnCI_Y8vcoV_lVmkQJJIk-b3_B1yex6C27TBFrJ8hFEGWQj51kKj06Qh0OK6AYaw== Text: Availability: 1 Value: <anid>AN0076373296;hed01may.12;2019Feb27.12:29;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0076373296-1">Australia’s 1988 Bicentennial: national history and multiculturalism in the primary school curriculum. </title> <p>As in many countries, such as Germany, Turkey, the United States and Japan the history/culture wars of the past two decades have increased public interest in what is taught in schools. This has resulted in rigorous debates in the general community, encouraged and sustained through regular media coverage. Partly as a response to this, History has been designated as a separate subject in the first wave of planning and implementation of the Australian National Curriculum. Two of the reasons for this include first, to recognise the importance of teaching historical skills as a distinct subject; and second there is an ongoing bipartisan political interest in privileging history disciplinary knowledge and content to ensure that national history narratives are taught to students. To contribute meaningfully towards the development and implementation of a National Curriculum, it is important to understand past curriculum constructions, so that the disciplinary knowledge and content of history remains independent, and not subsumed within current (or future) political trends. Based on examples of national history from the Queensland Social Studies syllabus and government endorsed sourcebooks in the lead-up to the 1988 Bicentennial of British colonisation of the Australian continent, this article examines the influence and role of multiculturalism in History teaching in primary schools. Particular attention is paid to Indigenous representations and British heritages, as an example of two groups that have often been represented as binaries to each other throughout Australian history. An analysis of the curriculum materials illuminates the differences between multiculturalism and history—highlighting how the two are merged at the expense of accurate historical knowledge and concepts, particularly in the area of national history. This study will demonstrate that as a result of the infiltration of multiculturalism into history content within the Social Studies curriculum, historical knowledge becomes silenced in the school curriculum – resulting in vague and sometimes historically inaccurate information being presented to students; and the privileging of certain types of multiculturalism.</p> <p>Keywords: multiculturalism; history education; history/culture wars; curriculum; social studies</p> <hd id="AN0076373296-2">Introduction</hd> <p>The year 1988 is an important one in Australian history, being the 200th anniversary of the arrival of the First Fleet from Portsmouth, England to Port Jackson (Sydney), New South Wales. This event effectively began the modern history period of Australia, being the first colony established on the continent. The First Fleet, led by Captain Arthur Phillip (who was also given authority as the first Governor of New South Wales), was sent by the British government to set up a colony on the east coast of the continent with three main purposes. First, as a penal colony to disperse convicts from overcrowded prisons in Britain; second to act as a trading port; and third to source raw materials, for example flax, in order to make items such as ship sails. In more recent times, and especially in relation to the history/culture wars, the act and impact of the arrival of the First Fleet on the Australian continent in the year 1788 has been described variously as <emph>settlement</emph>, <emph>colonisation, occupation</emph> and <emph>invasion</emph> in public discourses as well as the school curriculum.</p> <p>As the bicentennial of the arrival of the First Fleet, the year 1988 is particularly relevant for this article's analysis of the enactment of multiculturalism in the school curriculum. During this time period, the intersection of two exemplar topics – Indigenous representations and British heritages – was particularly conspicuous in the public arena for their relationship to the 200th anniversary. The observance of the Bicentennial, also seen as a period of national renewal, is supported by the large quantity of popular histories written in an accessible way for the general public, frequently through public funding or commissioned by major publishing houses.[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref1">1</reflink>] Overarching the histories published during the lead-up to the 1988 Bicentennial (even those that seek to explore the complexities of the nation's history – past and present), is a discourse of <emph>celebration</emph>, arguably the most dominant discourse surrounding the marking of this historical event.[<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref2">2</reflink>]</p> <p>Whereas in earlier decades of the twentieth century, British heritages had formed the foundation of identifying as an 'Australian', by 1988 this had dramatically shifted to one of multiculturalism, with people officially encouraged, through government policies and programmes, to identify their patriotism through a multicultural lens. However, there existed a shifting of perspective, as described by Turner:</p> <p>The Bicentenary theme, 'Living Together', promoted a multicultural Australia through its emphasis on culture difference and variety. The ABA's [Australian Bicentennial Authority] contradictory attempt to simultaneously signify cultural difference and national unity, and the multiculturalist agenda seen as the motivation for such an attempt, met with resentment from (among others) the Anglo Right, who regarded the whole thematic project as an <emph>abandonment of Australia's predominately British (indeed</emph>, <emph>nationhood) in favour of non-British</emph> '<emph>minority interest groups</emph>' ...[<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref3">3</reflink>]</p> <p>Celebratory discourses were prevalent and obvious by even a quick scan of the types of histories published for a general audience leading up to the 1988 Bicentennial and these celebratory discourses included diversity in the Australian population through multiculturalism. These books, by and large, offered a very rose-tinted view of Australian history. Blemishes, embarrassments or generally negative aspects of Australia's past were either glossed over or not included at all. A notable exception to this was a 48 volume magazine series published by the nationwide newspaper, <emph>The Australian</emph>, of Australian history from pre-colonisation to the contemporary era. Here, a significant (but not unbalanced or overbearing) portion of the content reflected aspects of Australian history that are not regarded as positive examples of the continent's developing nationhood, and presents as a departure from the majority of for-general-public readership national histories, with a critical lens applied, highlighting both shameful and positive aspects of the nation's past. However, notwithstanding this, the dominant discourse of celebration is evident across publications and government sponsored events, such as the World Expo 88, the major event of the Bicentennial, held in Brisbane, Queensland.</p> <p>Even though the focus of government-funded advertisements and programmes was on multiculturalism as the prevailing and sanctioned discourse of national identity, the dichotomy between British heritages and Indigenous representations cannot be overlooked. One way this dichotomy was played out in a practical and visible way, at the instigation of a group of Indigenous Australians was through an 'Invasion Day' event. A similar event, called 'Day of Mourning' had first been held, instigated by The Aborigines Progressive Association, on 26 January 1938 to commemorate the 150 year marker of the arrival of the First Fleet; and again in 1970 to mark the 200 year anniversary of the arrival of Captain Cook on the east coast of Australia. On Australia Day in 1988, this event received significant media and general public attention due to its rejection of the common discourses of celebration. The main protest was held in the highly visible location of Lady Macquarie's Chair on the Sydney Harbour.[<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref4">4</reflink>] Australia Day was renamed, by the group protesting, as 'Invasion Day', a far more provocative term than 'mourning' and one that put across a clear and strong political perspective of what the day was actually commemorating. Whilst the dominant discourses were of celebration of Australian nationalism, this was a clear attempt by groups of Indigenous Australians to reclaim their history and to educate the general public about Indigenous issues that had emerged post-1788. However, even though there were strong pockets of resistance to the official messages and representations of nationhood, overwhelmingly a clear discourse of celebration, intertwined with ideas of multiculturalism formed the dominant representations of the 1988 Bicentennial, clearly marking the year as a site of celebration, optimistic reflection and renewal, especially seen in government funding of events and advertising.</p> <hd id="AN0076373296-3">Political context of multiculturalism</hd> <p>Policies of multiculturalism emerged strongly in the wake of the demise of the White Australia Policy.[<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref5">5</reflink>] Between 1901 when this Act was enacted – which interestingly was the first Act of Parliament passed by the newly formed Australian Federation – until its complete eradication in 1973, the Act had undergone a number of revisions, and was markedly different to its first iteration at the turn of the twentieth century. Nevertheless, it remained controversial due to the perception that it was racist against everyone, <emph>other than</emph> selected European, that is, 'white' Australians.[<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref6">6</reflink>] Towards the later years of the Act's existence it no longer contained these types of regulations, yet the <emph>perception</emph> remained that this White Australia Policy still existed and was detrimental to Australia's reputation – abroad as well as its own citizens' self-identity.</p> <p>As the White Australia Policy was diminishing, multiculturalism emerged in the 1970s as a priority area for governments. Ideas of multiculturalism put forth in a paper commissioned in 1977 by the Fraser government, as part of the consultation process prior to establishing a multicultural policy and enacting legislation included themes of '<emph>social cohesion, equality</emph> and <emph>cultural identity</emph>'.[<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref7">7</reflink>] This paper went on to define multiculturalism as 'multiculturalism exists where one society embraces groups of people with different cultural identities'.[<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref8">8</reflink>] In 1979, the <emph>Australian Institute of Multicultural Affairs Act 1979</emph> became the first multicultural legislation passed by a Federal government.[<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref9">9</reflink>] The purpose of the Institute can be read as a definition of how the Fraser government viewed multiculturalism, being:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> a. to develop among the members of the Australian community:</item> <p></p> <item> i. an awareness of the diverse cultures within that community that have arisen as a result of the migration of people to Australia; and</item> <p></p> <item> ii. an appreciation of the contributions of those cultures to the enrichment of that community;</item> <p></p> <item> b. to promote tolerance, understanding, harmonious relations and mutual esteem among the different cultural groups and ethnic communities in Australia;</item> <p></p> <item> c. to promote a cohesive Australian society by assisting members of the Australian community to share with one another their diverse cultures within the legal and political structures of that society; and</item> <p></p> </ulist> <p>• d.</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> to assist in promoting an environment that affords the members of the different cultural groups and ethnic communities in Australia the opportunity to participate fully in Australian society and achieve their own potential.[<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref10">10</reflink>]</item> </ulist> <p>Along with its general acceptance in the broader community, aspects of multiculturalism quickly found their way into the school curriculum, particularly in areas of Social Studies and Civics and Citizenship. Therefore, by the late 1980s it was no longer a new concept. Multiculturalism had had approximately a decade to become ingrained within the school curriculum, including refinements that may have needed to have been made. The critique presented in this article of the way multiculturalism is enacted in the school curriculum, is of a multiculturalism that had surpassed its first iteration, therefore had had time (theoretically at least) to mature and move beyond simplistic representations of diverse cultural groups within the context of Australian society and history.</p> <p>The popularity and general community acceptance of multiculturalism is well documented through, for example, the take-up of the community in participating in the celebration of multicultural events. It remains a key component of teacher education programmes,[<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref11">11</reflink>] and school syllabuses continue to include content related to multiculturalism (even though the concept is often not defined). The Queensland Studies of Society and Environment (SOSE) Syllabus mentions multiculturalism numerous times, for example in the explanation of social justice it states the following, without first defining what is meant by the term multiculturalism:</p> <p>A diverse range of ideas about justice exist across different cultures; some place more emphasis on the individual, while others place more emphasis on the group or community. <emph>Because of the multicultural nature of Australian society, this diversity is extremely significant and requires careful consideration</emph>.[<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref12">12</reflink>]</p> <p>Multiculturalism is also included as a feature in a number of outcomes. This one, from Level 5 of the <emph>Time, Continuity and Change</emph> strand of the Syllabus (which is generally regarded as the 'history' strand), exemplifies the way multiculturalism is approached:</p> <p>TCC 5.4 Students explain the consequences of Australia's international relations on the development of a cohesive society ...</p> <p>• construct a written argument about how a policy, law, treaty or agreement affected the development of a multicultural Australia.[<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref13">13</reflink>]</p> <p>Many criticisms of multiculturalism in an Australian context have been written by commentators and historians who are perceived as politically right-wing.[<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref14">14</reflink>] This has arguably resulted in a perception that, comparable to the history/culture wars, a binary has been established about this topic – stifling debate and commentary that seeks to move beyond simplistic one-sidedness. Whether multiculturalism is enacted in the school curriculum in 1988, in a simplistic or complex way, is therefore of keen interest to the analysis of the curriculum documents undertaken in this article. The value multiculturalism has in a nation like Australia that consists of a population of people with diverse ethnicities, is important to consider. The position taken in this studytowards multiculturalism is that, when not set up as a binary between the mainstream and 'Others', multiculturalism has the potential to provide valuable contributions towards a society that is rich in diversity, has genuine respect for differences while not focusing on them needlessly, and enables citizens to share and value each other's contributions to, and place within, a democratic society. The purpose of this article is not to engage in a deep debate about the merits and faults of multiculturalism – as it has been enacted in policies and the community at large – but rather to analyse its representation to primary schoolchildren, at the expense of the History curriculum. However, notwithstanding the importance of multiculturalism as a potential unifier in a nation which has a population of diverse ethnicities, the discipline of history is one that is privileged in thisessay – and a distinction is made between historical knowledge and disciplinary skills, and a present-mindedness towards historical topics.</p> <hd id="AN0076373296-4">Methodological approach/Research design and conduct</hd> <p>The methodological approach, undertaken for the larger study from which this article draws, applies Michael Apple's[<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref15">15</reflink>] concept of official knowledge to conduct analyses of a selection of school texts using a bricolage approach encompassing Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), visual analysis strategies and historical methodology approaches. As this essay draws on one aspect of the research project undertaken as part of the larger study which examined representations of Indigenous Australians and British heritages across multiple historical time periods of the twentieth century, the methodological focus will be on the application of CDA. In any case, CDA, itself an interdisciplinary approach, was privileged as the lead methodology in the original research, also incorporating visual analysis techniques; combined with an historical methodological approach and framed by Gramsci's[<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref16">16</reflink>] and Althusser's[<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref17">17</reflink>] notions of hegemony, ideology and power. This enables within a rigorous approach, 'research eclecticism, allowing circumstances to shape the methods employed'.[<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref18">18</reflink>]</p> <p>CDA is loosely defined as seeing 'discourse – language use in speech and writing – as a form of "social practice"'.[<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref19">19</reflink>] Its purpose is to 'investigate critically social inequality as it is expressed, signalled, constituted, legitimised and so on by language use'.[<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref20">20</reflink>] CDA is so concerned with how the broader societal discourses influence the data it analyses, that van Dijk refers to it as a 'sociopolitical discourse analysis'.[<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref21">21</reflink>] Specifically referring to CDA, Chouliaraki and Fairclough point out 'the contemporary field of critical analysis of discourse is quite diverse... some analysis of text... without drawing on any linguistic.[<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref22">22</reflink>] Where the methodology used for this project differs significantly from its application in purely linguistic studies is that it is applied on a macro level, as an overarching tool for the variety of sources gathered and analysed, rather than looking at the specific and grammatical functions of language.[<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref23">23</reflink>] Instead, language is analysed within its broader education and social context, specifically in the history discipline area of the Social Studies curriculum. By doing this, the focus of analysis is on the categories and discourses that emerge through the texts analysed. To clarify, although specific words, sentences and paragraphs are closely analysed, a critique of the minutiae of grammar rules and linguistic features does not form the approach taken here.</p> <p>CDA is aligned with document analysis in an historical framework due to its focus on the broader social and political locations and contexts, across historical eras, identifying the power discourses in language used in primary source documents. In this article, the practical application is the study of the Social Studies curriculum documents. As CDA views documents as social practice, this methodology seeks to explore and explain what these texts communicate to school students. Framing this within an historical approach sees CDA applied as 'a toolkit',[<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref24">24</reflink>] rather than an entirely prescriptive model.</p> <p>The analysis of data was completed by posing the following five CDA questions to each school curriculum extract selected:</p> <hd id="AN0076373296-5">Preliminary Analysis</hd> <p></p> <ulist> <item> 1. How are individuals, events or groups of people named and referred to linguistically (that is, what is the language used to describe people and events, in relation to Indigenous representations, British heritages and multiculturalism more broadly)?</item> <p></p> </ulist> <p>• 2.</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> What traits, characteristics, qualities and features are attributed to them (that is, what is the language used in the sentences around the linguistic description and how is ideology evident in the information selected to be included in the text)?[<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref25">25</reflink>]</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0076373296-6">Intermediate Analysis</hd> <p></p> <ulist> <item> 1. By means of what arguments and argumentation schemes do specific persons or social groups try to justify and legitimize the inclusion or exclusion of others?</item> <p></p> </ulist> <p>• 2.</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> From what perspective or point of view are these labels, attribution and arguments exposed?</item> <p></p> </ulist> <p>• 3.</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Are the respective utterances articulated overtly, are they even intensified or are they mitigated.[<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref26">26</reflink>]</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0076373296-7">Schooling context</hd> <p>The educational jurisdiction that this study draws on is Queensland, Australia. As education is a state responsibility, each Australian State and Territory has a separate Department of Education responsible for schooling, with separate syllabuses and curriculum documents written and disseminated for use in the classroom. While there are commonalities across the school systems, there remain separate education systems, with this article focusing on the Queensland primary school Social Studies curriculum in the lead-up to the 1988 Bicentennial. During this period, history in the primary school grades was taught within a subject called Social Studies, and specific content is outlined in is the <emph>Primary Social Studies Syllabus and Guidelines</emph>.[<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref27">27</reflink>]</p> <hd id="AN0076373296-8">Data</hd> <p>The syllabus, published only one year before the Bicentennial, provides an up-to-date representation of the Social Studies curriculum for this era, covering grades one to seven and complemented by a series of sourcebooks designed for teachers to use in the classroom as complete units of work. As the kinds of textbooks of previous eras, for example the government distributed <emph>Social Studies for Queensland schools</emph> series used between the 1950s and 1970s were no longer published, the sourcebooks took their place. Although there is no way to establish definitively how teachers mediated the materials, conversations with those who taught during the 1980s indicate that the sourcebooks were used widely. These sourcebooks then, are the official curriculum documents selected for the analysis of evidence of multiculturalism in <emph>history</emph> sections of Social Studies. As the official curriculum documents provided to teachers by the Department of Education for use in the classroom (complete with notes on what to say to students, specific content to cover and content to be photocopied for students to use), it is accurate to surmise that the content in these sourcebooks do reflect what was taught to school students, thus children's understanding of the nature of multiculturalism in Australia was shaped in the ways the authors of the sourcebooks apparently intended.</p> <p>School curriculum documents are what Apple describes as forming the official knowledge, as they are the Department of Education approved curriculum support materials for delivery and instruction in schools.[<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref28">28</reflink>] That is, curriculum content that is officially sanctioned by the curriculum decision makers (for example, Department of Education officials or syllabus committees), through the Department of Education, to be taught in schools. Far from seeing these curriculum documents as a 'neutral enterprise',[<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref29">29</reflink>] the concept of official knowledge theorises the way dominant values are communicated to students as a type of non-overt method of inculcating students to view the world in particular ways. It is argued that dominant values are those usually viewed in society as being 'normal', 'just' or 'right' and broadly accepted to be 'true'. In a sense they have been repeated so many times, they become naturalised as a way of understanding the way the world is, becoming part of the hegemonic practice of schooling students.[<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref30">30</reflink>] The curriculum then, especially as represented through the syllabus and textbooks, is the translation of official knowledge intended to be 'what counts as valid knowledge';[<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref31">31</reflink>] in the case of this article, being the Social Studies curriculum during the 1988 Bicentennial era.</p> <p>During this period, Social Studies was positioned as its own subject, integrating the various approaches listed above, evident through the following key statements from the syllabus, with particular emphasis on developing historical knowledge:</p> <p>Social studies is about people and the societies in which they live. It focuses on people as intellectual, spiritual, emotional and social beings, and on how they relate to each other and their environments in local, national and global settings. <emph>Social studies also involves learning from the past, investigating the present and considering the future of people and their societies</emph>.</p> <p>...Social studies provides a structure through which children can organise and build on their experiences of the world. To achieve this, social studies draws upon a range of disciplines and areas of knowledge for its mode of inquiry and content.[<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref32">32</reflink>]</p> <p>This rationale emphasises the importance of understanding history within a contemporary context, an aspect of study particularly relevant when situating the curriculum within the 1988 Bicentennial sociopolitical context. The fact that the rationale points out that students should be taught historical knowledge demonstrates that history disciplinary knowledge is distinct within this syllabus, beyond its incorporation within an all-encompassing Social Studies curriculum.</p> <hd id="AN0076373296-9">Data analysis</hd> <p>This section demonstrates that by and large representations of individuals and groups of people who do not fit within narrow Anglo-Australian constructs are portrayed adhering to stereotypical ideas of how these people behave and activities they engage in. Therefore, a type of multicultural exotica results, whereby Anglo-Australian cultures are constructed as banal and of the everyday and all other cultures are portrayed as exciting and elusive (in doing this, it also positions Anglo-Australians as belonging to one cultural group, void of any complexity). The data and accompanying analysis demonstrate how this is enacted in school curriculum documents. The analysis of these documents is grouped into three categories: multicultural stereotypes; Australian Indigenous representations; and representations of British heritages.</p> <hd id="AN0076373296-10">Multicultural stereotypes</hd> <p>Multicultural stereotypes are firmly entrenched in a number of examples within the Social Studies curriculum. This potentially results in students learning about non-dominant cultures in simplistic ways that seek to further marginalise representations of non-'white' Australians. Furthermore, it possibly entrenches pre-conceived ideas that groups of people (outside the dominant group), engage only in activities that are overtly traditional cultural practices. The first example that illuminates this is the front and back covers of each of the sourcebooks. These contain a pastiche of images representing Australian society – both in contemporary and historical times (see Figure 1).[<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref33">33</reflink>] For example, major non-people images include: the Australian flag, $1 coin, $10 note, a tall-ship (representative of Australia's colonial era), and a merino sheep (representing the Australian wool industry). The images of people – unless showing them engaged in distinct ethnic-cultural activities – are Anglo-Australians, depicted as being engaged in everyday activities such as: buying groceries, playing softball, carrying out computer work, and general farm work. On the other hand, people who do not fit within the Anglo-Australian mainstream are shown <emph>only</emph> as engaged in stereotypical cultural activities. For example, a Greek-Australian is shown in Greek national dress. Noteworthy is the visual representation of two Indigenous Australians. The first, on the front cover, is an Indigenous male playing the didgeridoo and dressed in traditional attire; and the second is on the back cover depicting an Indigenous person as a stockman from the Northern Territory. Although the visual images may depict a variety of racial groups or ethnic identities, they do not extend beyond a simplistic, and somewhat tokenistic, representation of groups of people who do not fit within an Anglo-Australian categorisation, as they are only shown engaged in traditional and/or stereotyped roles. By only including non-dominant groups of people in traditional contexts, it is evident that the type of multiculturalism endorsed in this source is one of stereotyping. The understanding of multiculturalism being exotic and on the fringe of mainstream society is reinforced to both teachers and students. While arguably the front and back covers of the source books <emph>are not</emph> part of the explicit curriculum in the primary school grades; they do constitute aspects of a hidden curriculum, as they are a visual depiction of the whole of the Social Studies curriculum, designed with teachers as the audience in mind.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 1. Front and back covers of the 1987 Primary Social Studies syllabus and guidelines.</p> <p>An additional example of people of non-Anglo-Australian origin being depicted in an arguably stereotypical way is in the <emph>Primary Social Studies Sourcebook Year 5</emph>.[<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref34">34</reflink>] Here, in a unit titled <emph>Unit 1: Settlers of Australia</emph>, an image of a Southern European woman (most likely Greek) is included as part of the title page (see Figure 2). She is depicted in a traditional way of wearing a scarf around her head and in a fruit shop – it is unclear whether she is the owner of, or worker or shopper in the fruit shop. This is arguably a stereotypical representation, as Greek people were often attributed as owning fruit shops.[<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref35">35</reflink>]</p> <p>Graph: Figure 2. Image of woman with fruit.</p> <p>If the two examples analysed in this section were part of a larger and more diverse representation of multiculturalism in an historical context, then they would not be out of place – as part of rich representations of diversity. However, this is not the case for the curriculum documents of this era. Rather, multicultural representations are consistently seen as being exotic, different and positioned as the 'Other' – juxtaposed against ordinary Anglo-Australian representations.</p> <hd id="AN0076373296-11">Australian Indigenous representations</hd> <p>Unlike previous decades of the twentieth century, representations of Indigenous Australians were no longer mediated through their inclusion with stories of other historical events. For example, the way Indigenous Australians had been included on the fringe of stories of early inland exploration in the Social Studies school curriculum of the 1920s and 1960s to 1970s. Instead, Indigenousa Australians during this era were included as having their own, legitimate culture as a distinct group. However, this also meant that Indigenous Australians were not represented anywhere else in the curriculum <emph>outside of</emph> Indigenous specific content, maintaining the positioning of Indigenous Australians on the periphery of history. In 1988, the curriculum still positioned Indigenous Australians very much in a traditional environment (as seen in Figure 1). They are not part of mainstream society, as urban dwellers or anything else of the sort, nor do they play a role in any aspect of modern Australia (that is anything that is post-1788). Instead they are only included in units of work that specifically, and solely, cover aspects of Aboriginality, often in an ahistorical way (for example, kinship and moiety systems), but posing as part of historical knowledge. So, Indigenous representations are not seen throughout the general curriculum, in images of families, celebrations, and other support images. In this respect, Indigenous Australians have the same place in the curriculum as all other non-Anglo-Australian groups, that of being very much on the periphery of historical content, and only included in ways that demonstrate distinct difference from mainstream society.</p> <hd id="AN0076373296-12">Representations of British heritages</hd> <p>British heritages are generally embedded within a very vague terminology of <emph>European</emph> where <emph>Britain</emph> would be more appropriate and historically accurate. For example, the colonisation of the Australian continent by Great Britain marked by the arrival of the First Fleet, is described as 'European' in the <emph>Primary Social Studies Sourcebook Year 5</emph>,[<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref36">36</reflink>][<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref37">37</reflink>] and issue analysed in further depth later in this article. More often, British heritages are included as significantly disjointed from the main purpose of the given historical narrative, included as random anecdotes or footnotes to history narratives, rather than an important component of events. Instead of discussing any British roots or framework in modern Australia, history is very much presented as only 'Australian' without the influence of Great Britain in the past or present. Given the national history of modern Australia, this is clearly a revision of history that marginalises and minimises British involvement and represents national history through a distinct present-mindedness. It is as though in celebrating the 1988 Bicentennial combined with the influence of multiculturalism, education authorities are attempting to establish a distinct 'Australian' identity through selective history narratives. This is at the expense of historical understanding of British influences and participation, with discourses of multiculturalism taking the place of British heritages in specific content areas, such as colonisation.[<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref38">38</reflink>]</p> <p>Three key examples have been selected for analysis in this section that demonstrate the silencing of historical disciplinary thinking within an all-encompassing discourse of 'European'. The first example demonstrates the marginalisation of British heritages that commonly occurred in the curriculum materials during this era. In a major activity for <emph>Unit 1: Settlers of Australia</emph>, the colonisation of Australia is referred to as 'The first European settlement'.[<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref39">39</reflink>] Using the term <emph>first</emph>, seems to imply that there were subsequent European countries to colonise parts of Australia, when in fact this was not and is not the case. Reading this sourcebook two decades after it was first published, it does not seem historically logical to frame the British colonisation of Australia through the term 'European settlement'.[<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref40">40</reflink>] It is as though Great Britain is mitigated through a vague Europe discourse as a way to minimise the involvement of Great Britain in Australia's early modern history.</p> <p>The second example, in the <emph>Social Studies Sourcebook for Year 5</emph>,[<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref41">41</reflink>] sees the term 'European' rather than <emph>Great Britain</emph> or <emph>British</emph> used to describe the colonisation of Australia. This is first used through the following passage discussing the change of lifestyle that occurred to Indigenous Australians as a result of colonisation processes: 'During the discussion, encourage the children to realize that the lifestyle of Aboriginal groups remained relatively unchanged until the <emph>European settlement</emph> of 1788'.[<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref42">42</reflink>] By not including correct terminology, a type of history denial is occurring, whereby Great Britain is becoming anonymous. However, unlike when Indigenous Australians are treated as anonymous subjects in history, this is not done to subjugate Great Britain, but rather can be seen as a general move away from recognising Australia's British heritages. Ultimately, this denial of history is damaging to the remembering of a nation's past. In this specific case, <emph>Europe</emph> is such a vast continent with so many different nations, nationalities and cultures residing in it, often with competing interests to one another, that to use the term <emph>European</emph> (rather than British) to describe the First Fleet and subsequent colonisation of Australia ignores or brushes over Australia's modern history in such a way that is obfuscating the responsibility the school curriculum has in ensuring that students receive an accurate portrayal of the facts of the nation's past – which includes the positive and the shameful.</p> <p>The third example demonstrates that when British heritages are included as a component of Australia's national history, it is in connection with legal and government discourses. Any reference to the cultural influence Great Britain had on Australia (which is very significant, particularly in the early stages of Australia's modern history) is not mentioned. This is evident in the <emph>Primary Social Studies Sourcebook Year 5</emph>[<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref43">43</reflink>] in a section within <emph>Unit 3: Decision-makers of Australia</emph>, that teaches students about Australia's Federation in 1901 and the construction of the Constitution. Here, Great Britain is given no privilege over the influence of the following other nations' systems of governance in forming Australia'snational framework: Canada, Switzerland and the United States. There is one minor exception to this, demonstrated in Figure 3,[<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref44">44</reflink>] whereby one of the motives for Federation is attributed to Australians' loyalty to Great Britain.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 3. Motives for Federation after 1850.</p> <p>British heritages, as represented in the school curriculum, demonstrate a national history identity crisis in the 1988 Bicentennial era curriculum. Acknowledging both the diversity of the Australian population and the independence of Australia as a nation, topics which would, based on historical knowledge be reasonably expected to highlight representations of Great Britain are instead replaced with topics related to a non-specific multiculturalism and cultural diversity. In the primary years, students are exposed to very little information about Australia's past (or current) connections with Great Britain. Other than a unit in year 5 that briefly includes information about the reasons for the British colonisation of Australia and the beginning years of colonial history, there are no other explicit examples of British heritages in the core curriculum. Even when content specifically related to actions by Great Britain is included in the Social Studies or History curriculum, it is mitigated through terminology of an undefined <emph>Europe</emph>. This fails to recognise that Great Britain did not refer to itself as <emph>Europe</emph> (especially during the period of history in which events that form the curriculum occurred – the late eighteenth century), but as a distinct nation and empire, as did the other nations in Europe (evidenced, in part, by their many conflicts with each other). To describe British colonisation as 'The first European settlement'[<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref45">45</reflink>] is to ignore basic facts of history, namely: first Great Britain was the only imperial power to colonise the Australian continent; and second to recognise the role Great Britain played in Australia's early colonisation period. Instead, students receive a type of anonymous version of Australia's national history that does not aid in equipping them with an accurate representation of the facts of early colonial history however positive, negative, celebratory or shameful these representations are. Furthermore, the Social Studies curriculum significantly limits the exposure students have to learn the historical literacy and threshold concepts (characterised by a mastery of a range of skills, abilities and knowledge) of this discipline.</p> <hd id="AN0076373296-13">Analysis</hd> <p>Analysis of the curriculum materials for this era demonstrates that topics and concepts related to national historical knowledge in the lead-up to the 1988 Bicentennial are not consistently or strongly evident. Instead, any celebratory discourses of Australian history focus on multiculturalism, at the expense of both British heritages and Indigenous representations. Aspects of early modern Australian history that cover British heritages are generally either ignored or significantly mitigated through a vague discourse of 'European' settlement. Indigenous representations, particularly in the primary curriculum, demonstrate an ahistorical representation of Indigenous Australians. This potentially leads to an inaccurate representation of national history taught to school students.</p> <p>Regarding the place in the school curriculum of Indigenous Australians, during the 1988 era, this group is still very much on the fringe of the Social Studies curriculum – included only as part of special events and celebrations – with very little indigenous history included, beyond an ahistorical description of Indigenous cultures prior to the 1788 colonisation. The inclusion of multiculturalism within the school curriculum, then, did very little for increasing awareness of Indigenous Australian histories. As discussed throughout the analysis, there is an obvious absence of British heritages represented in national history, even when topics are included that lend themselves to have British heritages extensively included. More often, British heritages are included as being significantly disjointed from the main point of the given historical narrative, included as random anecdotes or footnotes to history narratives, rather than an important component of events. Instead of discussing any British roots or framework in modern Australia, history is very much presented as only 'Australian' without the influence of Great Britain in the past or present. By eliminating many references to British colonisation and other aspects of history that have a clear British connection, it is as though the syllabus and curriculum writers are trying to avoid being British-centric. However, by eliminating British histories and by replacing British-originated events with terms like 'European', then a false, almost xenocentric history is taught to students, which has significant impacts on students' understanding of their national history. This potentially leads to uninformed views of historical events in Australian history, particularly associated with the period of British colonisation. It is as though in celebrating the 1988 Bicentennial, Australia is attempting to establish a distinct 'Australian' identity through selective history narratives, at the expense of British influence and participation. In addition, the overwhelming representation of non-Anglo ethnic groups demonstrate to primary school students that non-dominant cultures are exotic and revolve around traditional cultural activities – rather than as active citizens in the Australian community.</p> <p>The type of multiculturalism presented in the school curriculum separated cultures outside of the Anglo-Australian mainstream, firmly placing people of distinct ethnic origins represented only through special days and events. Distinct messages that demonstrate this type of multiculturalism, endorsed through the Social Studies curriculum are listed here. First, although diverse groups of peoples are included in the curriculum, they do not form part of the core curriculum, and are only visible during special events and celebrations that are usually add-ons to the curriculum – to be included if there is time, or if teachers have the inclination. Second, only Anglo-Australians are depicted doing everyday activities, such as civics type duties, playing sport and shopping. Combined with the first point, this ensures that people who are not Anglo-Australian are seen as a type of <emph>exotica</emph>. Third, multiculturalism is a complex concept, with many diverse definitions of what it means and how it should be enacted – it was seen this way in the 1980s, just as much as it is now. Therefore, to present it in such a simplistic way is to miss potential key teaching moments that introduce students to its complexities.</p> <hd id="AN0076373296-14">Conclusion</hd> <p>The historical analysis of the curriculum materials presented in this article highlights the complexities of History as a school subject, especially when positioned within a broader Social Studies curriculum. This can be contextualised to a number of current issues facing this curriculum area. For example, one that has been repeated throughout the duration of the history/culture wars; an increasingly crowded curriculum and one which marginalises History at the expense of an all-encompassing Social Studies. As a distinct issue, this can really start to be seen in the 1980s, with an ahistorical and multicultural approach that Social Studies took <emph>at the expense of</emph> accurate historical information and narratives. Instead, content was subsumed within emerging dominant sociopolitical discourses (buoyed by government policies and initiatives). This saw the privileging of a vague multiculturalism as the nation's historical narrative, rather than a depiction of the past based on history discipline concepts, and one that values both Indigenous and British heritages. Although Social Studies has long been a subject taught during the primary school years in Queensland schools, this subject had previously maintained separate History and Geography discipline dimensions. The point here is not to form a criticism or evaluate the usefulness of a multicultural policy or approach; but rather to point out that from the data collected and analysed, it appears that an all-encompassing, all-inclusive 'multicultural' perspective replaced a coherent 'historical' approach in this curriculum area. This is arguably detrimental to the education of primary school students as they are not being equipped with historical knowledge of their nation's past. Connecting the analysis of multiculturalism as part of the History curriculum within Social Studies, it is timely to consider the type of content included and excluded in the newly evolving Australian national curriculum. Curriculum content, including what has previously been included in textbooks, can speak to the content selected for the national curriculum as a way to warn against importing contemporary political interests into the study of history, at the expense of historical disciplinary knowledge and at the expense of accurate, meaningful and rich content designed to engage and teach students.</p> <hd id="AN0076373296-15">Notes on contributor</hd> <p>Heather Sharp is an Education lecturer with the School of Education at the University of Newcastle, Australia. Dr Sharp's research interests include analysis of History curriculum taught to school students, representations of history and critical pedagogy in education. Her doctoral thesis, centred on representations of Australian history in Queensland school curriculum materials throughout selected time periods of the twentieth century. Heather is currently researching national history representations of the First World War in Australian and Turkish school textbooks.</p> <ref id="AN0076373296-16"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> <sups>1</sups>See, for example, M. Clark, M. Hooper and S. Ferrier, <emph>The Ashton Scholastic History of Australia</emph> (Gosford, Australia: Ashton Scholastic, 1988); J. Molony, <emph>The Penguin Bicentennial History of Australia</emph> (Ringwood, Australia: Penguin Books Australia, 1987).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref2" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> <sups>2</sups>For an extensive critique of this discourse of celebration, see T. Bennett et al., <emph>Celebrating the Nation: A Critical Study of Australia's Bicentenary</emph> (Leonards, Australia: Allen &amp; Unwin, 1992).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref3" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> <sups>3</sups>G. Turner, <emph>Making it National: Nationalism and Australian Popular Culture</emph> (Sydney: Allen &amp; Unwin, 1994), 70, emphasis added.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref4" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> <sups>4</sups>This was also the site of the re-enactment of the arrival of the tall ships of the First Fleet, covered by all major television networks and press associations.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref5" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> <sups>5</sups>This is a colloquial and commonly used term to describe Australia's <emph>Immigration Restriction Act, 1901</emph>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref6" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> <sups>6</sups>Indeed, particularly in the early years this concern was well-founded, with for example, the instigation of dictation tests for people who wanted to immigrate to Australia. These dictation tests could be taken in any European language and later any prescribed language, and which language was selected was at the discretion of the examiner. As stated in the Act, this applied to: (a) Any person who when asked to do so by an officer fails to write out a dictation and sign in the presence of the officer a passage of fifty words in length in an European language directed by the officer (<emph>Immigration Restriction Act, 1901</emph>, <emph>ss</emph>. 3).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref7" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> <sups>7</sups>Australian Ethnic Affairs Council, <emph>Australia as a Multicultural Society</emph> (Canberra, Australia: Australian Government Publishing Service, 1977), 3, emphasis added.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref8" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> <sups>8</sups>Ibid., 3–4.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref9" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> <sups>9</sups>Although this Act was repealed by the Hawke Labor government in 1986, it was replaced with the Office of Multicultural Affairs, which existed within the Office of the Prime Minister; thereby demonstrating the continuation of multiculturalism in government policy and the bipartisan support of this concept and its enactment at a national level. This bipartisan support has continued; although in 2006 when the most recent federal government multicultural policy expired, it was not renewed by the then-Howard Liberal government and has not been reinstated by any of the subsequent Labor governments. The Federation of Ethnic Communities' Councils of Australia has recently called for a new national policy to be implemented. For further discussion, see L. Kerin, 'Group Calls for New Policy on Multiculturalism', Australian Broadcasting Corporation, <ulink href="http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2010/s3080052.htm">http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2010/s3080052.htm</ulink> (accessed December 3, 2010).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>10</sups>Australian Commonwealth Government, <emph>Australian Institute of Multicultural Affairs Act 1979</emph>, <emph>ss</emph>. 5.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>11</sups>See, for example, R. Gilbert, ed., <emph>Studying Society and Environment: A Guide for Teachers</emph>, 3rd ed. (Southbank, Australia: Thomson Social Science Press, 2004); R. Reynolds, <emph>Teaching Studies of Society and Environment in the Primary School</emph> (South Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 2009).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>12</sups>Queensland School Curriculum Council, <emph>Studies of Society and Environment: Years 1-10 Sourcebook Guidelines</emph> (Brisbane: Queensland School Curriculum Council, 2001), 4, emphasis added.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>13</sups>Ibid., 39.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>14</sups>See, for example, J. Hirst, <emph>Sense and Nonsense in Australian History</emph> (Melbourne: Black Inc, 2006); G. Blainey, <emph>All for Australia</emph> (North Ryde, Australia: Methuen Haynes, 1984); and for a critique of multiculturalism in Australia, see G. Hage, <emph>White Nation: Fantasises of White Supremacy in a Multicultural Society</emph> (Annandale, Australia: Pluto Press, 1998).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>15</sups>M. Apple, <emph>Official Knowledge: Democratic Education in a Conservative Age</emph> (New York: Routledge Press, 1993); M. Apple, <emph>Official Knowledge: Democratic Education in a Conservative Age</emph>, 2nd ed.<emph>(</emph>New York: Routledge Press, 2000).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>16</sups>A. Gramsci, <emph>The Modern Prince</emph> (New York: International, 1957); A. Gramsci, <emph>Selections from Prison Notebooks</emph>, trans. Q. Hoare and G. Nowell-Smith (London: Lawrence and Wishart, 1971).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>17</sups>L. Althusser, <emph>Lenin and Philosophy</emph>, trans. B. Brewster (London: New Left Books, 1971); L. Althusser, <emph>Essays on Ideology</emph> (London: Verso, 1984).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>18</sups>J.L. Kincheloe, 'On to the Next Level: Continuing the Conceptualization of the Bricolage', <emph>Qualitative Inquiry</emph> 11, no. 3 (2005): 325.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>19</sups>N. Fairclough and R. Wodak, 'Critical Discourse Analysis', in <emph>Discourse as Social Interaction</emph>, ed. T.A. Van Dijk (London,: Sage, 1997), 258.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>20</sups>R. Wodak, 'What CDA is About', in <emph>Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis</emph>, ed. R. Wodak and M. Meyer (London,: Sage, 2001), 2.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>21</sups>T. A. Van Dijk, 'Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis', in <emph>Discourse Theory and Practice: A Reader</emph>, ed. M. Wetherell, S. Taylor and S.J. Yates (London,: Sage, 2001), 300.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>22</sups>L. Chouliaraki and N. Fairclough, <emph>Discourse in Late Modernity: Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis</emph> (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1999), 6–7.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>23</sups>For further discussion, see J.R. Martin and R. Wodak, <emph>Re/reading the Past: Critical and Functional Perspectives on Time and Value</emph> (Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2003); R. Wodak, 'Critical Discourse Analysis', in <emph>Qualitative Research Practice</emph>, ed. Clive Searle et al. (London,: Sage, 2004), 197–213; T.A. Van Dijk, 'Multidisciplinary CDA', in <emph>Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis</emph>, ed. R. Wodak and M. Meyer (London,: Sage, 2001), 95–120; Van Dijk, 'Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis'; T.A. Van Dijk, 'The Study of Discourse', in <emph>Discourse as Structure and Process</emph>, ed. T.A. Van Dijk (London: Sage, 1997), 1–34; J. Potter and M. Wetherell, 'Analysing Discourse', in <emph>Analyzing Qualitative Data</emph>, ed. Alan Bryman and Bob Burgess (London: Routledge, 1994), 47–66; and discussed as a 'no theory of grammar' approach by T. Threadgold, 'Cultural Studies, Critical Theory and Critical Discourse Analysis: Histories, Remembering and Futures', <emph>Linguistik Online</emph> 14, no. 2 (2003): 20.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>24</sups>H. Widdowson, 'The Theory and Practice of Critical Discourse Analysis', <emph>Applied Linguistics</emph> 19, no. 1 (1998): 137.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>25</sups>Wodak, 'Critical Discourse Analysis', 207.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>26</sups>Ibid., 207.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>27</sups>Department of Education, <emph>Primary Social Studies Syllabus and Guidelines</emph> (Brisbane: Department of Education, 1987).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>28</sups>Apple, <emph>Official Knowledge</emph>, 2nd ed.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>29</sups>Michael Apple, <emph>Ideology and Curriculum</emph>, 3rd ed. (New York: RoutledgeFalmer, 2004), 7.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>30</sups>See, for example, Luke's understanding of hegemony: A. Luke, 'Text and Discourse in Education: An Introduction to Critical Discourse Analysis', <emph>Review of Research in Education</emph> 21 (1995–1996): 3–48.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>31</sups>B. Bernstein, <emph>Class, Codes and Control: Theoretical Studies Towards a Sociology of Language</emph>, rev. ed. (London: Routledge &amp; Kegan Paul 1974), 203.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>32</sups>Department of Education, <emph>Primary Social Studies Syllabus and Guidelines</emph>, 2, emphasis added.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>33</sups>Department of Education, <emph>Primary Social Studies Syllabus and Guidelines</emph>, front and back covers.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>34</sups>Department of Education, <emph>Primary Social Studies Sourcebook Year 5</emph> (Brisbane: Department of Education, 1988), 7.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>35</sups>For example, as popularly represented in a 1980s television show, <emph>The Comedy Company</emph>, with a key character 'Con the Fruiterer' being a parody of a stereotypical representation of Greek-Australians.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>36</sups>Department of Education, <emph>Primary Social Studies Sourcebook Year 5</emph>, 7.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>37</sups>Department of Education, <emph>Primary Social Studies Sourcebook Year 5</emph>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>38</sups>See, for example, ibid., <emph>Primary Social Studies Sourcebook Year 5</emph>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>39</sups>Ibid., 26.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>40</sups>Department of Education, <emph>Primary Social Studies Sourcebook Year 5</emph>, 26.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>41</sups>Ibid.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>42</sups>Ibid., 17, emphasis added.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>43</sups>Department of Education, <emph>Primary Social Studies Sourcebook Year 5</emph>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>44</sups>Ibid., 116.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> <sups>45</sups>Department of Education, <emph>Primary Social Studies Sourcebook Year 5</emph>, 26.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Heather Sharp</p> <p>Reported by Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref45"></nolink> |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ968510 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Australia's 1988 Bicentennial: National History and Multiculturalism in the Primary School Curriculum – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Sharp%2C+Heather%22">Sharp, Heather</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22History+of+Education%22"><i>History of Education</i></searchLink>. 2012 41(3):405-421. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 17 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2012 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research – Name: Audience Label: Education Level Group: Audnce Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Elementary+Education%22">Elementary Education</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22National+Curriculum%22">National Curriculum</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cultural+Pluralism%22">Cultural Pluralism</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22News+Reporting%22">News Reporting</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+Studies%22">Social Studies</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22History+Instruction%22">History Instruction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22History%22">History</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Course+Descriptions%22">Course Descriptions</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Political+Influences%22">Political Influences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Role%22">Role</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Indigenous+Populations%22">Indigenous Populations</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Geographic Terms Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Australia%22">Australia</searchLink> – Name: DOI Label: DOI Group: ID Data: 10.1080/0046760X.2011.625557 – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 0046-760X – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: As in many countries, such as Germany, Turkey, the United States and Japan the history/culture wars of the past two decades have increased public interest in what is taught in schools. This has resulted in rigorous debates in the general community, encouraged and sustained through regular media coverage. Partly as a response to this, History has been designated as a separate subject in the first wave of planning and implementation of the Australian National Curriculum. Two of the reasons for this include first, to recognise the importance of teaching historical skills as a distinct subject; and second there is an ongoing bipartisan political interest in privileging history disciplinary knowledge and content to ensure that national history narratives are taught to students. To contribute meaningfully towards the development and implementation of a National Curriculum, it is important to understand past curriculum constructions, so that the disciplinary knowledge and content of history remains independent, and not subsumed within current (or future) political trends. Based on examples of national history from the Queensland Social Studies syllabus and government endorsed sourcebooks in the lead-up to the 1988 Bicentennial of British colonisation of the Australian continent, this article examines the influence and role of multiculturalism in History teaching in primary schools. Particular attention is paid to Indigenous representations and British heritages, as an example of two groups that have often been represented as binaries to each other throughout Australian history. An analysis of the curriculum materials illuminates the differences between multiculturalism and history--highlighting how the two are merged at the expense of accurate historical knowledge and concepts, particularly in the area of national history. This study will demonstrate that as a result of the infiltration of multiculturalism into history content within the Social Studies curriculum, historical knowledge becomes silenced in the school curriculum--resulting in vague and sometimes historically inaccurate information being presented to students; and the privileging of certain types of multiculturalism. (Contains 3 figures and 45 footnotes.) – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2012 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ968510 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ968510 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1080/0046760X.2011.625557 Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 17 StartPage: 405 Subjects: – SubjectFull: National Curriculum Type: general – SubjectFull: Cultural Pluralism Type: general – SubjectFull: News Reporting Type: general – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries Type: general – SubjectFull: Social Studies Type: general – SubjectFull: History Instruction Type: general – SubjectFull: History Type: general – SubjectFull: Course Descriptions Type: general – SubjectFull: Political Influences Type: general – SubjectFull: Role Type: general – SubjectFull: Indigenous Populations Type: general – SubjectFull: Australia Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Australia's 1988 Bicentennial: National History and Multiculturalism in the Primary School Curriculum Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Sharp, Heather IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 01 Type: published Y: 2012 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 0046-760X Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 41 – Type: issue Value: 3 Titles: – TitleFull: History of Education Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
