No wonder people aren't doing history anymore if this is what is being offered up. People want to look forward not backward.

To the First, Second Fourth, Fifth and Eleventh Posters. The PM is entitled to his enlightened opinion. That some take all and every opportunity to bash him for doing so is a sad reflection on those small minds so obsessed.

As DFXK (Interesting name – are you a courier service?)

rightly said and as has been confirmed by the public expressions of certain school union luminaries following the last election “I fear the Australian will continue to print such stories until Labor looses some state elections.”

Imho, history is an important subject for anyone who seeks an analytical role or has an analytical interest. Only by studying the past do we discover, for ourselves, the pitfalls, dangers or opportunities of what we might plan to embark on today.

Acknowledging the old adage “history is written by the victors” and the natural human desire for self aggrandisement, both individually and nationally, the best strategy is to read the perspectives from many sides wherever possible.

If I have two perspectives on which to consider the same event, I am better equipped to resolve what I believe is the “underlying truth” than relying on just one.

From an Australian perspective, any view which denies the significant contribution which our “enlightened British heritage” contributed to forming the Australia of today is that of a moron.

If we were to look at history as a jigsaw puzzle where each view is a piece, ignoring That British Heritage is akin to attempting to finish the jigsaw after discarding 90% of the pieces. Whilst some might claim it is “complete”, anyone else would see the gaps and recognise the utterers of such claims as gullible fools.

I agree with the sentiment and content of the article.
We are lead by a man of vision. That he has a clearer and better vision for Australia than that of the dull, grey, levellers of socialism is merely an issue for those same socialist to come to terms with. Maybe they should read history (real history that is, not the fabled bunkum they would teach to our children)

I always found history to be quite a dull subject mainly because it seemed to me to have no real relevance and no real application. It was a subject that i learnt maybe a few interesting things about Australian involvement in the wars, the treatment of Aborigines by early settlers, and even a little about ancient Egypt.
But of what practical use is any of this information apart from something i can talk about to impress my friends or some basis for opinions on war and indigenous affiars to influence my vote?

I don't know how history is studied at school these days but I think a core curriculum subject of History would much better serve if it first aimed at the purpose and practicalities of studying history, so kids learn why studying history is of use and how to go about it, ie. how to sort fact from fiction, how to verify reliability and impartiality of sources, how to analyse contrasting accounts, etc. That way they get the tools to critically analyse historical accounts (both past and present) and are better able to determine the truth for themselves as opposed to taking some Historian's word for it in a text book. Then they can go on to use these tools to study a specialised field of history like Australian military history or Australian settlement history and find out what really happened and draw conclusions on causes and outcomes from there.
To me that would be much more interesting and enjoyable to learn than just memorising specific events in a specific period of history.

The teaching of history in schools is fraught with many difficulties. History in the Junior School no longer exists. It has largely been replaced by Studies of Society and Environment - a national curriculum initiative which tries to squeeze history, geography, economics, business, civics and environmental studies into a single "subject".

However, apart from the curriculum difficulty, SOSE or history is simply not valued by politicians, the media, business or even the educational hierarchy. Its place in the curriculum is contested and the amount of time allocated to it has been significantly reduced in favour of studies such as dance, drama, industrial arts etc.

SOSE teachers generally do not have access to funded and supported in-service training. They are regarded as generalists. The assumption is that they can effectively teach anything in the broad range listed above. They usually have larger classes including numbers of unsupported special education students.

Students are encouraged not to 'take' social studies subjects. They are often supported by the education hierarchy when they challenge the teacher with , "Why do I have to do this? This won't get me a job." Maybe it won't. And maybe few of our 'leaders' value the development of informed, well rounded, questioning students who, given some understanding of our history and institutions, might go on to make worthwhile contributions to the development of our civil society.

Schools should be taught how ,in such a short time, this country is equal to the rest of the world in everything that counts.
We do not have ancient cathedrals and palaces, very little of our convict heritage survives because some felt shame about it.
I am intensly proud of our history,proud of this country and proud that we now tend for our indigenous people .
Children should learn about the pioneers, how they came and why they came and what they built.
There is much to be proud of in our beautiful Australia.

Predicting the past gets tedious.

Today is busy enuff as is.

Tomorrow is another day.