
Roger <arelem@bigpond.com> wrote:
From next year, every teacher from sport, English, math and science and social sciences will have to teach IT.
And the rationale for this is what exactly? (assuming that it's true - I haven't looked at any references). I emerged from primary school having been taught typing and basic word processing on the computers of the era. This was all primary school-level material and considered such.
History is now history of Asia and aborigines, not history of Australia.
I remind you that Aboriginal history is an important element of Australian history, so half of what you said above is in fact "history of Australia". History when I was at school covered mostly Europe, proceeding from Greek and Roman civilizations through to the industrial revolution and, finally, the twentieth century up to the collapse of the Soviet Union, which was everywhere in the news in 1989-90 just as we were studying the cold war in secondary school history classes. So far as I can recall, Asia wasn't mentioned at all throughout, except in connection with Japan in World War II. I think that's a very serious omission, given Australia's geographical proximity to south east Asia, immigration patterns, social and economic relations, etc. Of course, it might have been rectified had I studied history in years 11 and 12, but I didn't.
They're not even maintaining the illusion. Grammar is off the table as is spelling.
So primary school children won't be quizzed about common nouns, proper nouns, abstract nouns, collective nouns, etc.? It wasn't exciting; nor was it particularly useful. I learned more about grammar by studying a second language than I did in English class. That's probably because it wasn't taught either very well or very systematically. Spelling was covered, though, and it is important - again, as a primary school topic.

On Nov 20, 2012 6:09 PM, "Jason White" <jason@jasonjgw.net> wrote:
Of course, it might have been
rectified had I studied history in years 11 and 12, but I didn't.
I did year 12 history a couple of years ago - russian and chinese revolutions for us. Had to pick 2 of russian, chinese, french and american revolutions for that subject (history revolutions).

Bianca Gibson <bianca.rachel.gibson@gmail.com> wrote:
I did year 12 history a couple of years ago - russian and chinese revolutions for us. Had to pick 2 of russian, chinese, french and american revolutions for that subject (history revolutions).
That seems fair enough to me. To take this discussion right off-topic... I have some spare time at the moment, so I'm reading Immanuel Wallerstein's "The Modern World-System", among other things. A greater knowledge of history would help here, of course, as it is on the basis of macro-historical analysis that Wallerstein develops his theoretical position. His interpretation of history (via an engagement with the literature) is, not surprisingly, very controversial, but that's to be expected for many reasons.

Jason White wrote:
So primary school children won't be quizzed about common nouns, proper nouns, abstract nouns, collective nouns, etc.?
AFAIK the last generation to be formally taught grammar (as in, this part of a sentence is called X and here is how to recognize and use it) was my grandparents' -- people a couple of years too young to be trucked off to WWII. IMO it is a vital tool for studying foreign languages.
It wasn't exciting; nor was it particularly useful. I learned more about grammar by studying a second language than I did in English class. That's probably because it wasn't taught either very well or very systematically.
Precisely. Unfortunately trends in foreign language education (last time I looked) also shied away from grammar. It's all about being slapped with sentences without explanation and hoping you can guess the rules yourself. When my Mum was studying French recently, she had a book called something like "English grammar for French students", i.e. teaching anglophones to recognize parts of speech in *English* first, so they can then do so in while studying French. I remarked quite grumpily that she ought to have learnt that in school.

Trent W. Buck <trentbuck@gmail.com> wrote:
When my Mum was studying French recently, she had a book called something like "English grammar for French students", i.e. teaching anglophones to recognize parts of speech in *English* first, so they can then do so in while studying French. I remarked quite grumpily that she ought to have learnt that in school.
Yes, exactly. My understanding is that in France itself, this is all taught in primary school.
participants (3)
-
Bianca Gibson
-
Jason White
-
Trent W. Buck