yet more trash from the trash talker.

Yep, once again we see alleged conservatives attempting to start a cultural revolution in Australia.

Kevin, please stop calling yourself a conservative. What you write is embarrassing to real conservatives for whom the conservative political philosophy doesn't represent a program to institute some nonsensical white-trash cultural revolution.

I went to state school in the PM's own electorate. My curriculum was based on many of the things you criticise. I then went to an Anglican school similar to the one the PM sent his own kids to. Again, I didn't learn your white-trash style of cultural absolutism.

Your call to reinstate this cultural absolutism in education makes me wonder whether you have lost the plot completely. There is nothing "post-modern" about kids learning that there is life beyond mother England, and that there are in fact cultures other than English culture existing in Australia.

Please do not impose your revolutionary ideas on the conservative movement. Leave the monocultural revolution to fruitloops who celebrate their post-political career by dancing in musicals.

Just accept it. Australia is multicultural. This is our cultural status quo. We are no longer an English colony. We don't have a monolithic culture. We are still developing our culture.

If these facts are too painful, ring up Dr Who and ask him to lend you his time machine.

Kevin reading this post again after its first publication in the Australian on July 1, I find that I have not changed my views.

At best you have demonstrated failure by State Governments to adequately fund and amange curriculum change and have not demonstrated any real criticism of an Outcomes Focus in curriculum.

I am from WA and have been involved in the development and implemantation of an OFE in this state for over 15 years, mostly in the Mathematics Learning Area.

Outcomes has a teaching and learning focus. An outcomes focus allows teachers to identify what students know and what is needed to move that knowledge, skill or understanding further. It is developmental and recognises that learning is lifelong and continual.

Your arguments always seem to be about absolutes. It is as if having passed a driving test at 17 then you are a good driver. Clearly you are not and experience and circumstances continually teach you and your driving skill and knowledge continue to grow. That does not stop us being measured from time to time to demonstrate our proficiency and maybe there are stages in our lives when we should be. However, this is an example of how in all phases of life developmental learning can frame our understandings. So, it is in learning through schooling.

Your assaults on these changes have succeeded in undermining teacher morale and public confidence in classroom teachers but not succeeded in changing governemnt attitudes to supporting curriculum in any real manner.

WAChris

Oi Kev, what's this I hear about you receiving copious largesse from John Howard and Phillip Morris, the tobacco company? Pretty postmodern of you to be developing smoking information kits for schools sponsored by a tobacco company, don't you think? I guess that depends on what the kids were being told about it.

Do you recommend they flatten their ciggie packets to use as bookmarks when they're reading Dickens? No wonder you don't like outcomes focus - it could draw attention to the outcomes of your tobacco company sponsored involvement in education.

You're a funny old chap. Come over to my place sometime and learn the pleasures of smoking trout instead. It would make you seem far less hypocritical.

Sorry, I'm a Mum and I hardly understood a word of this article, though I did get the feeling the author favours a "fill the kids with facts then test em on it" style of education.

I've never had a problem understanding my kids reports, however, even though they went to those supposedly last bastions of politically correct bureaucrateese co-ed state comprehensive schools ( both doing really well, eldest off to Sydney Uni into her first choice of course). I always knew "working beyond" was an A, and "working towards" a D, just sounded more positive and hopeful, I thought, than the cold judgement of a D or worse.

I can't understand all the fuss about outcomes and reports. It seems manufactured to me. I've never heard a parent - and I mix with hundreds of them - say they didn't know how their kids were doing. I'm no fan of the NSW English course for the HSC, however, teaches bad writing, but I just tell my girls its a game they've got to play due directly to theorists - like the author - who push their own particular barrow and insist the rest of us play along. But my kid's teachers have always been clear about how my girls were doing, both in their reports and at parent teacher interviews - feedback not always pleasant, either. I am confused about the conflict, but this article only confused me further.

All I want from my girl's schooling is that they learn the basics ( very well achieved by their primary and infants schools) and then learn how to learn, and hopefully to love learning, rather than regard it as a chore and a burden. I don't see them as little briefcases that need to be stuffed with facts or with someone elses opinion on what is "good" anything and what is "bad". I want them to have their own opinion and be educated well enough to be able to back it up

The writer asks: “Why is outcomes-based education under attack from both sides of the political spectrum?”

1. Because it’s easier to attack what you don’t understand than to understand it.
2. Because there’s votes in attacking OBE.
3. Because any politician (or school principal) who supports OBE is excoriated by the writer in the national press as an unAustralian, anti-Christian, postmodern pinko.

And many other reasons. But certainly not because OBE “embodies a dumbed-down and politically correct approach to education”.

The way to get a curriculum that’s really “dumbed-down and politically correct” is to involve politicians in the making of it. And that includes the writer, whose extensive political activities are public knowledge.

I look forward to the sort of brave new curriculum that the new curriculum micro-managers are cooking up for us. How about ‘The New Objective Non-Ideological and Cant-Free History of Australian Industrial Relations’ by Julie Bishop: “Once upon a time, the Australian workplace was a wilderness inhabited by unenlightened savages. Then, in 1996 and 2006, a series of brilliant reforms led us to nirvana where employers and staff negotiate on equal terms in an atmosphere of mutual respect and understanding.”

I’m sure that a majority of serving Federal MPs would agree there is nothing politically correct or dumbed-down about that. (Coming soon from Windschuttle Publications!)

And how is it “increasingly obvious that Australia's adoption of [OBE] has allowed standards to fall and put generations of students at risk”? (And no, the polemic ‘Why our schools are failing’ isn’t evidence.) At risk of what? At risk of some unspecified, unnamed, amorphous, all-encompassing “risk” that, in current-affairs speak, “no responsible parent can afford to ignore”? Sorry, but one of the things OBE taught me is to recognise propaganda when I see it.

The only thing that’s “increasingly obvious” is that the writer continues in the practice of selective evidence-gathering, one-sided presentation and a career-wrecking McCarthyist demolition job on those who, in his opinion, are engaged in thoughtcrimes. And he has the hide, as recently as this week, to accuse others of indulging in “ideology and cant”.

I remember that a dozen or so years ago Australia took pride in teaching children how to think, which was unlike those poor children in Japan and other places in the world that taught children by rote. It seems we have gone full cirlce and it is now trendy again to teach by rote...

As for the article, I am still confused about this apparent conflict. This article did little to explain the difference between the opposing camps.

It is ironic that a student based classroom started from Private Schools known as the "matron system" or "cottage system". Basically, the teacher assessed what each student's abilities were and what each student could achieve to their highest potential, then expanded on that to the standard. Often parents, nuns, priests, and lay clergy, assisted in more tutoring for assistance. This is closer to outcomes based education under a partnership model than what we have now in the State school stystem.

What we still have is the old "moratorium system" from Victorian times, that is, cram the rooms with as many bodies as possible, shove them in, then push them out as fast as possible with minimum expense.

Scrutiny is be placed on the teacher constantly, and lengthy reports from this huge group of students have to be presented to the Principal. That is how the NSW Education System functions now. Everyone knows that something has gone wrong with this pretention of an OBE system. Most of all, the teachers themselves. It is an ideal rather than a reality.

The assessment codes, that is A, B, or C as standard nationally is not such a bad idea, particularly for those of us who have had to adjust to different state systems.

This standard code is different in relevance to OBE.

With outcomes, we are assessing and setting standards for or with the children assuming that we and they, know what their needs are.

The paedogogy in positive language to coach them along is more complex.

Does Outcomes Based Education work? Yes. It is just our systems are not following the formula properly. It is supposed to raise standards, not drop them.

Should we put student needs over academic standards? No. All students need academic standards and this includes vocational education. The schools need to support the students more to high standards, have smaller classes and more partnership from the community.

You can't expect the teachers to lower their standards to the students, and by magic, expect high standards as the outcome. That is where the educrats have failed.

Oh for the halcyon days of Kevin’s childhood, when people communicated in meaningful A-E letters instead of feel-good postmodern gobbledygook. Let’s take a trip down memory lane... (imagine your screen dissolving into wavy lines)

A Portrait of the Frustrated Political Operative As A Young Man

Mr Donnelly Snr: “Hi honey, I’m h-ome!”
Mrs Donnelly: “How was your day dear?”
Mr D: “It was A, thanks. How about yours?”
Mrs D: “I’m feeling a bit C actually.”
Mr D: “Oh, poor chicken. Why don’t you lie down and I’ll fix you a cup of tea and a Bex?”
Mrs D: “You’re a doll.” (Chaste peck on cheek).
Mr D: “Now, where’s that brilliant young B lad of mine?”
(Donnelly Jnr storms through the door, school tie askew, socks rolled down in defiance.)
Mr D: “There you are boy. You’re looking pretty D there, what’s the matter?”
(Donnelly Jnr glares at father and slouches off to his room, slamming door behind him.)
Mr D: “I say, what’s got into him?”
Mrs D: “Oh, it’s that dreadful new-fangled Phonics they’re teaching him at school. The latest studies have proven he can’t understand a thing you say unless you sound it out.”
Mr D: “Really? What a B idea. I’ll try it at once.”
Mrs D: “A luck! I can’t get a letter out of him.
(knocks on Donnelly Jnr’s door)
Mr D: “I S-A-Y L-A-D, H-O-W A-R-E Y-O-U M-Y B-O-Y?”
Donnelly Jnr: “E.”
Mr D: “It speaks!”
Mrs D: “Oh, I wish they’d stop filling his head with this F modern teaching rubbish. I can barely have a whole-language conversation with him any more.”
Mr D: “Don’t worry dear. It’s just a bit of E teenage rebelliousness. He’ll grow out of it eventually, I’m sure.”
Mrs D: “I hope you’re right. It’s really starting to F me off.”
Mr D: “What would be really A is if he gets out and sees the world beyond our white-picket fence. Perhaps he should read something ‘multicultural’, so he can understand savage cultures better. I know just the thing - Little Black Sambo!”

You need to look again at the 1995 Eltis report--and perhaps to read it this time. the report did not condemn outcome based education--indeed, the report supports it. It did condemn the outcomes and profile approach which the Federal ALP and State Liberal Governments had both been pushing

Keep up the good fight Kev .

IRFAN.....

I looked and looked, but could not find anything in that article about "English Culture Rules"...... can you enlighten us ?

I could only see a discussion of 'OBE' verses 'CURRICULIM' approach.

Maybe u referred to some other article ?

Keep up your good work Kevin. I suspect that the corner has been turned and that OBE will thankfully be eased out over the next decade or so. Unfortunately a lot of young people, including my grandchildren will have suffered as the result of their experience with it.

Most people do not understand OBE and this is obvious from many of the posts on this site.

In effect in OBE learning objectives have been rewritten. Traditionally they were almost exclusively about academic matters. In the OBE model the objectives (called outcomes) are a combination of social, behavioural and attitudinal matters tacked on to academic matters. Having broadened the objectives it is only common sense to conclude that less attention will be given to academic matters, leading to academic dumbing down. This is what has happened. In terms of things academic, young people know less and can do less. It is a deadful shame.

But there is hope. Far more people are coming to understand the flaws in OBE and politically the message is getting through that it needs to be put aside and replaced by a curriculum model that maximises academic standards.

As a student who has had to live through this crazy educational experiment I must say Kevin is spot on. It's sad that educational theory is never decided on results but rather philosophy. I mean its just a way of writing the syllabus and people still get narky about it, its just easier to tell teachers what they need to teach.

I have taught in Government High Schools in the ACT for nearly 15 years now, and I am irresistably drawn to the conclusion that OBE is wrong.
I note that the ACT has the most advanced forms of OBE in Australia and that the ACT also has an enormous drift from the Government to the (largely non-OBE) Private sector - so much so that no less than 39 Government preschools and schools are currently listed by the ACT Legislative Assembly for closure and/or amalgamation. That's a lot of schools for a population not much bigger than that of Geelong in Victoria!
I now work in a predominently non-OBE model school with an enrolment waiting list (!) - it would appear that educated parents are voting with their feet. Even in "OBE-speak" two plus two does indeed equal four.
My OBE students at my previous school had not been taught to read independently beyond "functional literacy", whereas my current school's "traditional academic curriculum" students are taught not only to read Shakespeare, but perform and interpret it as well (not to mention the fact that they could also write basal readers if required).
We are paying a very, very heavy cost for OBE in the ACT Government sector.
My poor students from my last school were robbed; they should have been taught to read and write - OBE is educational poison to be avoided at all costs.
TAC.

Well said TAC and Ace.

The more people become informed the sooner this OBE experiment can be done away with and replaced by something that values strong academic standards.

I am a fan of outcomes as a concept, but will concede that their implementation has been less than perfect. If we think of outcomes as a minimum standard - what we want students to achieve - then surely they serve as useful guidelines for students when constructing their assignments, as well as benchmarks for teachers when assessing them? There is still a place for criteria-based assessment, but the criteria assess the extent to which the students have achieved a certain outcome.

I think education has always had outcomes, but in the past they have often been implicit rather than explicit. Teachers knew what they wanted their students to achieve - and knew what the state wanted their students to achieve - but this wasn't always laid out clearly in a simple statement.

Thus the problem may not lie with OBE as a whole, but with the outcomes themselves and with the way schools implement them in their curriculum. I am the first to admit that the outcomes in QLD's Junior SOSE Syllabus are terrible. Trying to piece a work program together that recognises the world beyond Asia-Pacific is nearly impossible. But I don't blame the Outcomes system for that - I blame the outcomes themselves. When the next OBE syllabus comes out, hopefully it will have a broader-reaching focus and will allow me to include a wider scope in my courses. But I, for one, hope that the next syllabus DOES have outcomes in it.

• Saintfletcher ..."What we-still-have is the old 'moratorium-system' from Victorian-times, that is, cram-the-rooms with as-many-bodies as-possible, shove-them-in, then push-them-out as-fast-as possible with-minimum-expense. Scrutiny-is be-placed on the teacher constantly, and lengthy-reports from-this-huge group-of-students have-to-be presented-to the Principal. That-is-how the NSW Education System functions now. Everyone knows-that-something has-gone-wrong with-this-pretention of an OBE system. Most-of-all, the teachers themselves".

Yeah, where-a-fair teacher's award should be: YOU TEACH PROPERLY AND YOU WILL KEEP YOUR JOB"! Contrary elders-of-zion sought-plotted-outcomes! Where-so-profoundly hand-picked damn-kosher-gurus are conditioned to perplex elementary-schooling and rigorously monitor-universities-buffer, at-the-great-cost to the civil society. Where one may-be-excused for having dejected-perception at-times of being just-an-alien visitor from some-distant-planet. Thus having-to-face a user-pay consequences. Which must-be contemptible for the conscientious-citizens within a country where ensuing generations of youngsters grow and proceed into the adulthood without having a single elevated role-model. Someone to-look up-to (as our maverick Mark Latham), towards the impending achievements to-come.

Still-a-lone voiced Professor-Messel, vocally protested over the years against the rampant rot-n-ruin within our educational establishment. In-turn to-be bucketed with lots-of-filth, coming from the connived-zionist-quarters. Countered by a typical his commentary ... The tall-poppy syndrome is a major deterrent-to-excellence in Australia. We're the greatest-group of the knockers in the world. If we put-as-much effort into-being positive and supporting things as-we-knocking, there would be no-nation-equal-us. The state-schools were in-chaos and allowed the students who could-not-even-read, to-graduate.

What I have to say, will undoubtedly-be-disputed vigorously by many people. And especially the radical, liberal-education-reformists. They been-successful-beyond their wildest dreams so that today even the slow-learners graduate with-near-credit or distinction letters-of-commendation from their teachers. The fact that, in-some-instances a student can't even-read what the teacher wrote, appears to-be of-little-consequence. Chaos seems to-be the ruling-system while our educationalists keep boasting about what-excellent-results they have-been-achieving.

The university degrees becoming less-n-less meaningful. As it now often-indicates roughly that the student has-achieved a knowledge-level equivalent to that, what should-have-been achieved by the end of high-school. The education standards were plummeting, because-cultural-change in Western-Society was destroying the family unit. Which meant children-no-longer got loving-care, attention-and-discipline. I'm fighting for something of the vital-concern to Australia.

For an-eye-opener proceed to Socrates principle exposé ... http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4632#46140

Yet in spite of the above uttered Professor-Messel's words of enlightenment, by-hook or by-crook the most comprehensive corruption of the youngsters mind perseveres on-a-mass in the Ghetto Australis. Just as in good old-days of the earliest elders-of-zion instigated cunning campaign, to invoke an-innate tribal primitive-instincts of envy, culminating often in a brutal-bullying. Utilised to divide and conquer goy-n-shiksa duped fools, under the "rule by the best" on the planet earth (due to the almighty chosen Jew aristocracy, since time immemorial). Which not meant for any derogatory manners acrimony, under racist exploits. As our Jew-lesser brethren sustained enough of the collateral ravage fallout consequences.

What was snugly disguised towards the 21st century via scapegoated cliché under "tall-poppy" syndrome's façade. Just to excuse for premeditated king-hit riddled manifestations, all along the adherence to the local folklore motto: SHOOT ANYTHING MOVING AND CHOP ANYTHING GROWING. No wonder when some were indoctrinated not-to-think for themselves, but solely conditioned for the laidback predisposition. Reflected in a once popular lingo: "steady as she goes"..."she'll be right mate"..."near enough, is good enough"... and so forth parodied deliverance.

As a result many of desensitised minds weren't geared-up to-grasp consequently that cuckoo-nest incubated rulers or preachers could have had a bloody chutzpah to distort-truths so incredibly. Especially pertinent with a colonial patronage on-mind, who envisaged that no Aussie bloke or sheila ever-to-realise their true predicament in the Ghetto Australis. Whilst overshadowed we are by the most bizarre cretinism, unleashed under tyrannical oppression siege. Where no-reward to-excel or appreciation given for the role-model-citizens within the created apartheid via deliberate IR elimination procedures in place.

Arranged by subversive institutional cliques for our surrender into malignant buffers. Set to eradicate entirely our conscientious dissent of genuinely devoted professionals. No wonder as imbeciles lot were nurtured with a carte-blanche, whilst incorruptible souls of the genuine mortals to-endure devious wrath. Still, so many of ill-informed minds failed even to-realise what hit them indeed. Without expecting in the wildest dream to face such a nightmare of the utterly insidious act.

For an eye opener proceed to the diminished democracy exposé ... http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4625#47660

Kevin
One has only to read, ever so cursorily, the comments to this article, to know why we need people like you, ready to challenge the education flummery that passes for curriculum and intellectual piursuit in the schools in this country.

As someone has said, if you want to find the last vestiges of soviet Marxism, just lokk in the staff rooms of our Universities and public schools!

Hmm. Have you actually looked, Simon Templar, or are you just trading off a cheap and lazy stereotype?

Some people clearly believe that the average Australian school-teacher bicycles home from their kiddy-Marxist indocrination classes to hang out with the collective munching on tofu burgers, watching SBS and painting posters for the next anti-war rally.

Actually, the average Australian school-teacher drives their 12-year old car home to their mortgaged house (capitalist running-dog landowners that they are!), perhaps picking up the kids on the way, cooks dinner (sausages again), and maybe marks some homework before heading in for an early night in front of prime-time TV.

Yep, a real hot-bed of radicalism, these staff-rooms.

You'd better go and check again for some Reds under the bed, Simon; you've a greater chance of finding them there.

Keep up the good work Kev,

As a WA teacher I could not agree more with your summation of the the ill-concieved Curriculum Framework "The WA Curriculum framework says it is not a syllabus as such and that its primary focus is on outcomes. Once again, the focus is on developing new age attitudes, dispositions and values, such as inclusivity, collaboration and partnership, flexibility and environmental responsibility to the detriment of giving students a solid foundation in academic subjects."
The CF focusses entirely on a bunch of jargon-laden outcomes and very little on any actual knowledge.
Science comes from the latin word "Scientia" which means knowledge.
Science is a body of knowledge that can be learned in many different ways but in the end the concepts must be learned and understood before they can be applied or used to argue a case of any kind (which the trendy ethics outcomes makes essential).
This is the failure of OBE in WA (and everywhere else). No emphasis is based on learning anything specific and in the end students, parents and teachers are unsure of what is expected of them.
It was this criticism that caused the failure of the new OBE style courses of study to be introduced into WA senior schools and until a decent syllabus and assessment procedure is created it is why they will continue to fail.