Rod Kemp (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I know Mr Andrew is a great believer in music education and would be delighted that I am making this speech in the chamber at this moment. I thank him for attending. As I said, the government has approved over $26 million in the first three rounds of the very popular Investing in Our Schools program to go to a range of music related projects. I hope that this funding can continue and indeed will increase.

At a national conference in Perth on 7 July, the minister announced 13 winners of the inaugural national awards for music teaching for their exceptional contribution to the status and quality of musical education in schools. The government has committed over $400,000 over four years for these awards. The minister also announced at the conference a $1 million grant over three years to support the Musica Viva Australia program in schools. This will allow Musica Viva to extend its internationally acclaimed music education packages to more students in regional and remote Australia and to develop and expand its delivery of professional development courses for teachers. There are a number of other very important initiatives, but time will not permit me to go through them.

I welcome these initiatives and the commitment that the minister is showing to the review. But while there has been progress in some areas, I think it is true to say that there have been a number of somewhat worrying developments. For example, there is concern amongst music educators that the primary principals summit that was held last month appeared, at least to some observers, to amount to a further downgrading of music education. Some observers have also pointed out that there is a degree of inertia in some state bureaucracies which may be unwilling to face up to the need for change and reform in music education. This is somewhat surprising because at the national workshop in August 2006 there was unanimous agreement from the delegates of every state education system for the national review and its recommendations.

I have also been surprised that there seems to have been limited progress towards the development of a national curriculum. This is a key recommendation from both the national and Victorian workshops. A properly constructed national curriculum will not only provide teachers with essential content and direction but will enable the proper assessment of outcomes. Parents are always keen to find out what their children are achieving. I am advised that the issue of a national curriculum is still on the table and I live in hope that the state and federal governments can develop a comprehensive national curriculum which gives effect to key recommendations of the national review.

But there remains a large turnover of music teachers and a large number of inexperienced teachers who are in real need of help in lesson planning and curriculum delivery. Without a national curriculum, there are no clear threshold standards for music education. The education of music teachers was a key recommendation of the review and requires further action. This also extends to generalist teachers, who are given only minimal exposure to music training during an education program at university.

Further, principals are often handed the responsibility for promoting music education at the school level. I know this is certainly the thrust in some states where the education bureaucracies seek to devolve responsibilities to the schools. In many cases this can be a good thing, but the truth is that, without adequately trained music teachers, it becomes virtually impossible for those principals who are inclined to develop significant music programs to achieve their goals.

There is much work to be done. People keep asking: why the delays? Why is it taking so long when there is broad agreement on the recommendations which should be followed? I urge all those who have an interest in music education to continue to press for a comprehensive response to the review’s recommendations.