ABC 891

E&OE TRANSCRIPT Interview - 891 ABC Adelaide Breakfast with Matthew Abraham and David Bevan Monday 13 October 2014 SUBJECT: Release of the review of the Australian Curriculum DAVID BEVAN: Christopher Pyne, Education Minister, is with us now, because the much feared, I think, in some quarters – there’s a fair bit of fear and loathing around this review of the National Education Curriculum, and it’s a bit of a surprise that everyone seems to think it’s a good idea. According to The Age, the review’s main finding that the curriculum is overcrowded, especially in the primary school years, has been backed by the federal opposition, principals, Catholic and independent schools, and the Victorian Government. Chris Pyne, what have you done wrong? CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Well, I don’t know if… DAVID BEVAN: I mean, this has got to be a disaster, doesn’t it, for the Abbott Coalition? CHRISTOPHER PYNE: I think the truth is that there was a lot of hyperbole about the curriculum review when I first announced it in January, which I thought was misplaced. I think there was a lot of unnecessary angst in some quarters, and the review that I handed down yesterday is a very common-sense, sensible document that has received very widespread support across the board, because a lot of people, particularly parents, we all want the best outcomes possible for our kids at school, and this curriculum review shows the way to make it easier for our schools to get a better result. DAVID BEVAN: Well, the two people you appointed, Kevin Donnelly, who has been an outspoken critic of what he sees as leftie agenda in the classroom, and Ken Wiltshire – did you have to pull them back a little bit? Did you have to have a quiet word with them and ask them to knock some of the more extreme recommendations out? CHRISTOPHER PYNE: No I can tell you, in fact, I haven’t talked to Ken Wiltshire and Kevin Donnelly since the first initial days their review began in January, because my decision was to leave it to them to do the job that they needed to do. What’s been great, in terms of the substance of this review, is that most people believe that the reviewers have done a very good job, because they have. And we don’t need to have a political debate about the curriculum every time the word is mentioned. We do want it to be uncluttered in primary school years. We do want a back to basics approach around science and history and English and maths and more phonics, and we don’t need to hide from our western heritage; nor do we need to downplay the role of Indigenous and Torres Strait Islander Australians to the contribution to our civilisation here now We can all – we can meet all markets, as they say. DAVID BEVAN: Right. So you can do everything without making it crowded. If you’ve got – mums and dads right now, they’re getting their kids ready for school. Going back to school today. And little Jimmy and Sally are going to head off to the classroom. Under this review, how would things be different for them if it kicked in today? CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Well, they would have more depth and less breadth in primary school, for example. So rather than trying to do aspects of the curriculum that they would do in senior school, they wouldn’t be doing it in primary school. They would be focusing… DAVID BEVAN: But can you give an example? I mean, what’s some of the – what you think is an extreme example of stuff that kids shouldn’t be bothered with in primary school, and that’s going to be jettisoned so they can focus on how to count and how to read? CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Well, I don’t think there’s any need for primary school children to be learning about geography or economics or health sciences. They all do physical education anyway as part of their sport. So rather than trying to attempt to do too many subjects in reception to year 6, the review suggests – and I think it’s a good idea, and I hope the states and territories will agree – that they should focus on the basics: history, English, science, and maths, and then when they get to senior school, have the buildings blocks that are necessary for them to be able to learn about all the other parts of the curriculum. DAVID BEVAN: You want to – this report, sorry, the recommendations are to remove the cross-curriculum themes of Indigenous, sustainable, and Asian perspectives from, for instance, the maths and science areas, where – in those areas of those subjects where they’re considered irrelevant. CHRISTOPHER PYNE: I think a better way to put it is not to remove them, but to have the themes fit the curriculum content, rather than trying to make the content fit the theme. So, for example, in maths and science, it has been quite a struggle for teachers to make maths and science meet the themes of Australia’s place in Asia and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture. Now, in some parts of the curriculum, of course, that’s very appropriate, and the reviewers suggest in history, for example, there should be a unit all of its own devoted to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture and history, and the same for Australia’s place in Asia. But I think perhaps in the drafting of the first curriculum – and this is the first big review of the national curriculum, let’s not forget, so it’s a really important step along the way. The first curriculum, a very good curriculum, they’ve gone a great job, but some people think perhaps that might have gone too far in trying to have themes rather than content. This review says, let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater and start again, but let’s build on what’s been before and make the content – make the themes fit the content, rather that the content fit the themes, and I think that’s an eminently sensible suggestion. DAVID BEVAN: Okay. If you’ve got a question or a comment you’d like to put directly to the Federal Education Minister Christopher Pyne give us a call, 1300 222 891. The text line is 0467 922 891. They’re your kids and you get to have a say directly with the Minister if you want to take that opportunity. Christopher Pyne, do you need the states to cooperate? CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Definitely. And that’s why the Government has only released an initial Australian Government response rather than handing down the review and the Commonwealth’s position and saying, this is our stance and we’re not moving from it. What I’ve announced is an initial government response, how we feel about where we are at the moment with the review, and I’ve said I want to sit down with the states and territories, at our Education Ministers’ meeting in December and talk to them in depth about what they think are the good aspects of the review, what they think that they could implement. I’ve asked the Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority to also have a good look at the review and see how they might be able to implement a lot of its recommendations, and it has to be collaborative approach [indistinct]… DAVID BEVAN: If they don’t toe the line, can you put a bit of pressure on them, for instance, attach funding to cooperation with these curriculum goals? CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Well, the states run the schools, so if a State Minister refuses to adopt a national curriculum, that’s a decision for that state or territory. I think it would be a disappointing step, but it’s a decision that they have to make. DAVID BEVAN: Yes. But if… CHRISTOPHER PYNE: I’m not a state Education… DAVID BEVAN: But if they don’t sign up to what you’ve adopted – what you think is a good idea, if they don’t sign up to that, could they lose their funding? CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Well, David, I’m Captain Cooperative today. I’m trying to make people work together rather than [laughs] DAVID BEVAN: Well, Captain, my Captain, can you explain to our listeners whether you’re going to get tough? You obviously think this is important. This is a big deal. This is really important because it affects the lives of another generation of kids. CHRISTOPHER PYNE: It does. DAVID BEVAN: And you believe that the generations have been let down by an overcrowded curriculum. That’s fair to say, isn’t it? CHRISTOPHER PYNE: I believe – I think the curriculum has been inadequate for several decades. DAVID BEVAN: Right. So you believe – this is important – that if they don’t come on line, are you prepared to get tough? CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Well, I think we’re a long way from that decision because I do believe that the Education Ministers will want to work cooperatively to bring about a better curriculum. I don’t get the sense from anybody in the education space that they want to turn their back on a review of the national curriculum, and I feel that we will be able to get an excellent outcome for Australian students by working cooperatively. So I’m not even contemplating a get-tough approach when I’m trying to work collaboratively with them. DAVID BEVAN: Okay. Is there any uniform that goes with being Captain Cooperative? Is it… DAVID BEVAN: You know, like a little cape or… CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Two big Cs. Two big Cs, like the old two Chrises we used to have. DAVID BEVAN: Yes. Now, Chris Pyne, how can you get the states to agree with this when the two authors of your report have not agreed on how it should be implemented, the new curriculum. So they’ve both – they’ve got different ways. Ken Wiltshire apparently wants to concentrate on the three Rs in the first three years of school. Kevin Donnelly advocates four subjects being mandatory, English, maths, science and history, and slimming down all eight subjects to include only the essential content. CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Well, there are 30 recommendations, and one recommendation out of those 30 has two options, an option which is just literacy and numeracy from foundation to grade 2, and the other one is history, English, science and maths from foundation to year 2. So… DAVID BEVAN: Yeah. Well, that’s a pretty big – that’s a pretty big option that they disagree on, and that is – because that’s a slimming-down option, and everybody says, this is good, the de-cluttering of primary… CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Well, both options suggest a very big slimming down from what’s currently there, and I think you’ll find that this is part of the discussions that we’ll have, what people’s preferences will be, and this is why we’ve released an initial Australian Government response. But I think that’s a very positive thing, to be given options, rather than be told, you know, we must do this or you must do that. I think it’s a positive step forward that we can now work together and Education Ministers and the Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority get their opinions about what we should do. DAVID BEVAN: Andrew has called from [indistinct]. Good morning, Andrew. CALLER ANDREW: Good morning, guys. Good morning, Chris. DAVID BEVAN: What’s your question, Andrew? CALLER ANDREW: My question is where would any curriculum changes affect an independent school, for example, a Waldorf School that has a Steiner education – my son goes to one of those and where would any changes affect him? DAVID BEVAN: Christopher Pyne. CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Of course, there are a diverse number of schools across Australia teaching different methods. They still have to teach the basic curriculum and so if you’re at a Steiner School or a Waldorf School, if you’re at a particular religious schools, they aren’t allowed to simply teach whatever they want to teach. They have to have an accredited curriculum. Now, most of those accredited curriculums will still teach the basic national curriculum, but the methods might be different. Where you would diverge from that, of course, is the International Baccalaureate, which again is an entirely different curriculum taught within our schools, but that’s been accredited by governments and been approved for use. DAVID BEVAN: Okay. So everybody got the same curriculum. How you get there is up to you. Yeah. CHRISTOPHER PYNE: That’s right. So in a Steiner School where the teaching methods are quite different, you know, everyone has to choose their own course. DAVID BEVAN: Another question from Irene at Ingle Farm. Good morning, Irene. CALLER IRENE: Good morning. My comment, basically, is that if all of the schools across the states have the same curriculum there would be continuity for the children of people like Defence Service personnel or bank personnel who get moved around from State to State on a regular basis. DAVID BEVAN: Okay. Irene, thank you for your thoughts. We’ve got a text here, Christopher Pyne, saying, I cannot believe that history is more important than geography. CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Well, I’m afraid the basic subjects of the national curriculum are history, science, maths and English. Geography is very important, but when I went to school geography was an elective subject that you began in senior school, whereas history, English, maths and science was something you studied throughout your schooling. So that is a decision not made by me; by wiser people probably decades, if not centuries, ago. DAVID BEVAN: Chris Pyne, before you leave us we did learn over the weekend of the death of Bob Such, originally a member, obviously, of the Liberal Party, and then an Independent in Fisher. I’m interested in your views on the passing of Bob Such. CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Well, Bob Such was a person that I knew for 30 years and he was a friend of mine, and I was very sad and sorry that he couldn’t stay in the Liberal Party many years ago. I think he would have been a continuing positive contributor to the Liberal Party and a Cabinet Minister in the Brown Olsen and Kerin Governments if he’d remained. DAVID BEVAN: He was, effectively, hounded out, wasn’t he, in the Olsen Government? CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Well, that… DAVID BEVAN: Ridiculously. CHRISTOPHER PYNE: …was certainly his view and I think it was a very unfortunate time for the party. And my condolences, obviously, go to Lyn and the rest of his family. He was a very decent human being, a smart and intelligent contributor to policy debate, a person who did his research, who pursued issues that were important in his electorate and to the state, and the fact that he was in politics for so long, was both a Cabinet Minister and a Speaker, was elected as a Liberal and as an Independent speaks volumes for what his community thought about Bob Such. And it’s a great sadness that he’s died so quickly and in such tragic circumstances. DAVID BEVAN: Does his treatment really sum up the problems that the Liberal Party in South Australia has had? If they’d better handled the Bob Suches of this world they might have been in office a lot longer. CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Well, I think we can always handle things better. Labor has had a history of Independents in the House of Assembly as well like Norm Peterson and… DAVID BEVAN: But he should never have left the Liberal Party, should he, and it was a failing of your party that it wasn’t able to accommodate the Bob Such’s? CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Well, David, I’m not quite ready to start talking about the ins and outs of Bob Such’s exit from the Liberal Party the day after his – two days after his passing. I’m going to pass on that one. DAVID BEVAN: Okay. Christopher Pyne, thanks for your time. CHRISTOPHER PYNE: Pleasure. DAVID BEVAN: Education Minister, Christopher Pyne, and he’s a Liberal MP for the Adelaide seat of Sturt. [ends]