English curriculum and the culture wars

The curriculum abandoned the traditional idea that an English curriculum should aim at improving student literacy to the best of which each student is capable. There is no intelligible aim stated for this curriculum. That it embodies three of the left's ideological sacred cows, atheism, aborigines, Asia is self evident. The conclusion that the literacy achieved by the curriculum has been dumbed-down is unavoidable.

Suggested reading material by the K-10 curriculum includes such edifying texts as tweeny fashion magazines cook books, cartoons and advertisements. The notion that there is good and bad literature is not raised because it is assumed that all literature is good.

One significant criticism of the English curriculum was made by the conservative journalist, Miranda Devine (see here) who has, to her credit, consistently argued that children should be taught to read using the phonics method which links the letters in our alphabet to sounds. This traditional method, however, is not favoured by the education academics whose doctrinaire methodology corrupts their research.

What has been largely ignored is the type of material that the children will be expected to read when, or should we say if, they actually learn to read.

In its rush to be relevant, the new curriculum substitutes modern essays, that might be characterised as mini penny-dreadfuls, and picture magazines for what was once chosen by educated men and women as being good literature appropriate to the age of the student.

This curriculum assumes that its favoured literature, by reflecting the reality of life for today's youth, will soon have them reading. Sex, drugs, rock 'n' roll and little girls interests as revealed by their magazines are the substitute for quality. The only literary criterion applied is that the material be written in English – even poor English.

There is an implicit assumption in the curriculum, one that is completely misguided, that literature, like music, is a matter of taste; when, in fact, literature has a capacity to form, or perhaps reform, the character of the child.

It is into this pseudo English curriculum fabric that the drafters have woven their most sacred cow, multiculturalism. In the name of an English education, students will be introduced to Asian literature. The curriculum states:

Studying literature helps shape persona, cultural and national identities. Australia's evolving ethnic composition and the increasing national importance placed on our geographic location in the Asia-Pacific region brings with it a variety of cultural, social and ethical interests and responsibilities.(p.5)

We must assume that an English translation of Asian literature will be used. Exactly what the "ethical interests and responsibilities" are we are not told except that that the student will be exposed to "a variety" of them.

Students, however, whether in Grade 10 or Grade 12, won't ever understand why 99 percent of Asians live under tyrannies by reading Asian literature. This is because the definitive analysis of tyranny was written in Greek 2500 years ago and the difference between tyranny and good government discussed there was one of the foundation stones of Western opinions as to what constitutes good government.

Given that no express part of the curriculum will allow students to learn why only the West can lay claim to being a civilisation, it is a reasonable inference that the intention of the curriculum drafters was to mould Australian students to an Asian cultural outlook.

Unfortunately, no outbreak of the culture wars would be complete without reference to the plight of Aborigines. The English curriculum requires students to read (or listen to) Aboriginal dreaming stories in order to improve student empathy with our indigenous friends.

Students will not, however, generate empathy for the Christian or Jewish religions through reading the English translations of their sacred text. Although the King James Bible is one of the most influential pieces of English literature in the English-speaking world, it will not be studied as a part of the English course. You may ask, "why not?"

Probably because it would "shape personal, cultural and national identities" of the students; but just not the way the multi-culture police in the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority want them shaped.