Nola Marino (Forrest, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority Bill 2008. This bill will establish a new Commonwealth body, the Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority, that will develop and administer the new national curriculum and collect data providing analysis and research to governments.

Although the development of a national curriculum began under the Howard government, and indeed our current coalition policy is in favour of a national curriculum, the opposition has expressed sincere concerns about the direction the curriculum has taken in terms of its content under Labor. We differ from Labor in that the coalition supports flexibility in delivery and will also support choice for schools that wish to offer an alternative curriculum such as International Baccalaureate or Steiner schools. The current eight state and territory curricula and schools have a reasonable amount of freedom at a local level and the current move to a national curriculum in the proposed form will therefore threaten choice and diversity.

While this bill was being drafted the government appointed an Interim National Curriculum Board to work on developing it and that particular board appointed working groups in each of the four subject areas being covered by the curriculum—mathematics, English, the sciences and history. This new authority, ACARA, will assume powers over curriculum and assessment that are currently with state governments and it will be further empowered by its secondary role as the primary data analysis and research centre in relation to student assessment.

According to Dr Kevin Donnelly, the Director of the Melbourne based Education Strategies and author of Dumbing Down, whose article was published in the November edition of Australia’s Education Review, the importance of the national curriculum both in terms of what is taught and how it will be assessed, described as ‘core content’ and ‘achievement standards’, cannot be overestimated. The new curriculum to be implemented in 2011 and, covering kindergarten to year 12, will be mandated for all schools, government and non-government. While Catholic and independent schools have had some flexibility in relation to adopting government controlled curriculum, such as offering the International Baccalaureate or adopting a particular educational philosophy in the way that Steiner schools provide, in future such diversity and choice will no longer be allowed.

Also the recent Schools Assistance Bill 2008 tabled in the Commonwealth parliament states as a condition of continued funding that non-government schools must teach the proposed national curriculum. According to the Constitution, education is a matter for the states, therefore the Commonwealth government does not employ any teachers or manage any schools and the eight states and territories are responsible for what is taught and how it is assessed. In addition, to be politically correct, the greatest danger in imposing a national curriculum is that teachers wherever they teach will be forced to adopt a one-size-fits-all approach. Evaluating school and teacher performance by publicly releasing the results of how effective they are in implementing the national curriculum will only add to the pressure to conform. So much for diversity and choice!

I spoke in the House recently on the Schools Assistance Bill 2008 and I spoke of my concern that the new requirement in school funding agreements needed to comply with the national curriculum by 2012. Labor also promised not to alter the Howard government’s SES funding model for non-government schools for the 2009 to 2012 funding period. Yet the Schools Assistance Bill, currently the subject of a Senate inquiry, may, going forward, lead to a change in the funding model.

It also mandates that schools comply strictly with the national curriculum, introduces new disclosure requirements that will discourage community fundraising for improving school resources and abolishes establishment grants to new non-government schools. This will make it considerably more difficult for new and developing communities to develop choices and diversity for their children in their local area.

I have previously voiced my concerns that the proposed reporting requirements could even lead to well-run, successful independent schools decreasing their fundraising activities for extracurricular out-of-school activities in order to maintain their Commonwealth funding for day-to-day operations. Their funding could be capped at the 2008 rate, or worse, when non-government schools are forced to reveal their sources of funding, it would make it very simple for a Labor government to justify cutting back its funding contributions to independent schools. I reiterate: this is just simply wrong and is fundamentally flawed. Successful, well-run private schools have well-proven business plans for the future. They expect to continue to be successful, knowing the school board makes sound education and commercial decisions. They do not deserve to be punished for their sound decisions, decisions which include the acquisition of assets for the purpose of educating children.

The measure proposes to cut funding because a school is offering high-quality facilities and resources and is a radical change to the formula for Commonwealth funding for non-government schools. But the funding model also ignores many of the costs involved in offering diversity in education. I noted with interest a submission to the Schools Assistance Bill 2008 from the Queensland Catholic Education Commission, which stated:

We respectfully submit that the funding model fails to recognise the very high costs of enrolling Indigenous students. The cost of supporting these students is significantly higher than that of non-boarding Indigenous students.

At the Senate inquiry the Australian Association of Christian Schools’ chief executive Bob Johnston is reported in the West Australian as saying that benefactors could be reluctant to donate if they were to be named. He said that a business seen to support an independent school could be boycotted by opponents of private education. Independent Schools Council of Australia Executive Director Bill Daniels said:

We consider this to be intrusive and unnecessary and will almost certainly lead to a divisive public debate.

Labor has also announced plans to review school funding in 2010. On the evidence to date it is clear the government intends to return to Mark Latham’s private school hit-list, which is sure to get a re-run. Labor clearly plans to mandate the introduction of the national curriculum before the end of the funding quadrennium in non-government schools as a condition for those same schools to receive funding from 1 January next year even though we have no idea yet what the national curriculum will actually look like.

There is no justification for demanding schools sign up to an unfinished national curriculum proposal that they have not seen in return for funding. As Bethany Hiatt wrote of Christ Church Grammar School headmaster Garth Wynne in the West Australian on Saturday, 8 November:

It is appalling that schools are being held to ransom like this. We cannot operate without the funding but are not made aware of the actual details of the conditions attached until after the event. It is best described as financial blackmail of independent schools.

Earlier in the West Australian on Friday, 31 October Bethany Hiatt also interviewed Hale School principal Stuart Meade, who said:

It is a life lesson we teach our students all the time—don’t sign for something unless you know what you are signing for.

This is a widely held concern. The West Australian reported Senator Steve Fielding as saying that he had been swamped by calls from schools worried about being forced to sign up to the curriculum when the details were unknown. The senator said:

The Rudd Government is saying ‘trust us, we will give you the detail’ but most Australians would like to see the details first because education is such a cornerstone …

He also said:

The last thing schools want to feel is a gun to their head dictating what they can teach kids.

The Deputy Prime Minister has repeatedly refused to confirm that schools currently delivering alternative, internationally recognised curricula will be able to continue to do so. This puts at risk curricula that are designed for high-achieving students and special students and curricula based on alternative educational philosophies that parents may choose as most appropriate for their children. It also potentially puts at risk those faith based schools that teach specific faith based components in addition to their current state curricula.

The Deputy Prime Minister refused to give certainty to these schools by accepting the opposition’s amendment to the Schools Assistance Bill to remove the mandatory application of the unwritten national curriculum. Alternatively, the Deputy Prime Minister could amend the bill to allow ‘application of the national curriculum or an approved equivalent’ or similar legislative language. Instead, in a speech on Monday, 10 November, the Deputy Prime Minister deferred decisions about whether alternative curriculum based schools would be able to continue under ACARA. This means that, under the current government, ACARA will have the final say over whether certain curricula are allowed to continue, such as the International Baccalaureate, University of Cambridge International Examinations, Montessori schools, Steiner schools, Christian schools, Islamic schools, Jewish schools and those in my electorate like Child Side School in Boyanup.

For a national curriculum to succeed, ACARA and the government will need to convince each state education department, each state government and the non-government sector that the national curriculum will not interfere with those aspects of their present curriculum which provide the specialisation or differentiation supported by parents and that, in all other aspects, the national curriculum will be superior to their current curriculum. At this stage we have little idea what the national curriculum actually is for maths, science, history and English. We do know that the framing documents are currently being drafted, but so far the only documents that have been released are the initial advice documents on the history and science curricula. The final documents will not be presented until some time in 2009, yet the Schools Assistance Bill sought to tie the school funding to that particular curriculum’s assessment. The final impact of the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority Bill 2008 over the four-year period to 2012 is $37.2 million, made up of $20 million committed to support the work of the National Curriculum Board and $17.2 million initially committed to establish an independent National Schools Assessment Data Centre.

Non-government schools educate more than 40 per cent of Australian secondary students. Parents who take on extra work, save or go without in other areas of their lives just to send their children to non-government schools save the Australian taxpayer billions of dollars. My understanding is that non-government schools educate over 30 per cent of all students in Australia. Government funding assists in offsetting the cost of this education. Parents and students deserve choices in education. This bill is problematic for the 29 non-government schools in my electorate of Forrest. These schools pride themselves on offering a full learning environment for their students, inclusive of pastoral care that nurtures and develops the potential of all students. School boards also recognise that their students are not at their learning institution in isolation from the rest of the community, and a great deal of effort is made to embrace and work in partnership with the community. Parents also take a major and often direct interest in the schools in which they place their children. Through their application process and direct meetings, discussing the needs of their children and what the school has to offer, parents, teachers and principals all take a holistic approach to the education of those in their charge. There is ongoing monitoring and cooperation and a comprehensive information flow from schools to parents and the community through the schools’ dynamic websites that are one working example of their creativity and marketing skills that actively promote the achievements of their students.

Schools’ websites provide a wealth of information, from historical data about the origins of the schools, to vision statements and mission statements, their structure, their staff, curriculum information, discipline policies, current newsletters and virtual tours of schools. Take Mackillop Catholic College in Busselton. It currently has an enrolment of over 500 students from years 8 to 12. There is a strong pastoral focus to ensure the wellbeing of students and reflect the expectations of parents. The religious education program is conducted in accordance with the guidelines of the bishops of Western Australia and helps the students to develop a framework for their beliefs and values. The education program caters for all ability levels and leads to university, TAFE, traineeships and workplace opportunities. The emphasis is on providing opportunities for the development of the whole person—intellectually, physically, socially, emotionally and spiritually.

There is also Ocean Forest Lutheran College in Dalyellup, a co-educational day school established initially as a kindergarten to year 8 school in 2004. Today, in 2008, it caters for over 500 students up to year 12. It is clearly a working example of the need for and growth of independent schooling and the need for parents to have diversity and choice of educational opportunities for their children. An education at Ocean Forest gives students the opportunity to grow in intellect and develop values that are taught within the context of a Christian community that will equip them for their life’s journey in the 21st century. Kearnan Catholic College in Manjimup, originally founded by the Sisters of St Joseph in 1925, provides primary education facilities for local children and draws its secondary students from the surrounding regional areas of Manjimup, Bridgetown, Pemberton, Northcliffe and Greenbushes. The school’s website even provides information about children’s allergies and lists the names of those students as a preventative health measure to inform other parents and the community. I congratulate the school for this foresight.

St Brigid’s School in Collie offers a progressive learning community which nurtures the holistic growth of all children within a supportive Catholic environment. It has a commendable history of providing educational services dating back to 1902. The Cornerstone Christian College in Busselton caters for kindergarten through to year 12. The college board and leadership team aim to bring together and equip a competent team of Christian educators and support staff who are committed to making a life-enhancing investment in the students they serve.

What all this demonstrates is that independent schools in my electorate are well equipped to work within the current education curriculum. It also demonstrates that they do not consider the curriculum to be a single dimension to the education of our youth. Pastoral care of students and connection with parents complete the educational and nurturing environment. Georgiana Molloy Anglican School promotes the ethos of a communication triangle of parents, children and school, and believes that consistent communication is required to bring out the best in a safe and caring learning environment. Bunbury Cathedral Grammar School is another school that nurtures the learning ambitions of its students and has strong pastoral care. The school environment is one that provides opportunities that challenge and extend its students.

I note that the ACARA board composition will include a representative from each state and territory, as well as the Commonwealth, and representatives from the National Catholic Education Commission and the Independent Schools Council of Australia. I note that in appointing board members section 14 requires that the ministerial council ensures that members of the board collectively possess an appropriate balance of professional expertise in matters relating to school curriculum, school assessment and data management, analysis and reporting in relation to school performance, financial and commercial matters in relation to the management of educational organisations, and corporate governance. None of the five criteria for the composition of the board requires that anyone who has ever been a teacher should be a member of the board, and I believe it is particularly important that practising teachers should be consulted extensively in the committees and working groups under the ACARA board.

It concerns me that the government’s move, through the Schools Assistance Bill, requires additional financial information from non-government schools’ funding sources to be collected by the data collection and analysis arm of ACARA. However, while ACARA’s new powers in relation to the curriculum are considerable, they follow from the commitment to having a national curriculum that is designed to replace the eight current curricula around Australia, after the appropriate consultation and consideration. It is reasonable, therefore, to accept that ACARA will be the instrument to support the development and administration of a national curriculum.

See this speech in context