Australian Curriculum

In the Primary sector, formation of the Australian Curriculum: History (ACARA, 2016d) has provided essential teaching and learning opportunities, thus, enabling Australian teachers to develop students’ awareness of Australian history. Based on a Grade 4 unit of work (Maxwell, Burke, & Salton, 2016b), this particular essay will be guided by an overarching inquiry question: “How well have these lessons been planned to effectively teach history” (Salton, Burke & Maxwell, 2016a). To begin, this essay will outline the efficiency of the alignment between the unit and the rationale from the Australian Curriculum: History (ACARA, 2016a). Subsequently, this essay will focus on the utilisation of the cross-curriculum priorities (ACARA, 2016c) within
1). According to the general capabilities segment of the Australian Curriculum: History (ACARA, 2016d), “…general capabilities are… identified where they offer opportunities to add depth and richness to student learning…” (ACARA, 2016d, para. 2). The author/s of this unit have utilised the “literacy, and critical and creative thinking” (ACARA, 2016d, para. 1) general capabilities. However, “general capabilities are identified wherever they are developed or applied in content descriptions” (ACARA, 2016d, para. 2), thus, when the content descriptors used in this unit (Maxwell, Burke, & Salton, 2016b) are analysed it becomes clear that there should be more than two of the seven general capabilities encompassed within this unit (Maxwell, Burke, & Salton, 2016b). Additionally, this “embedded general capabilities” (QCAA, 2012, p. 5) approach is supported by the Queensland Curriculum and Assessment Authority (2012). In accordance to the content descriptors from the Australian Curriculum: History (ACARA, 2016a) that have been used within this unit, the general capabilities: “numeracy, information and communication technology capability, intercultural understanding, and personal
In contemporary society, not all of the information that is readily available is credible and accurate. Seven of the sources used within this particular unit (Maxwell, Burke, & Salton, 2016b, p. 3) are websites, and the other three are films. From face value the majority of the sources used within this unit (Maxwell, Burke, & Salton, 2016b) seem to be somewhat relevant and credible, however, when these sources are analysed using the SCIM-C (Hicks, Doolittle & Ewing, 2016) process many fall short of credible status. SCIM-C is defined as “Summarising, Contextualising, Inferring, Monitoring, and Corroborating” (Hicks, Doolittle & Ewing, 2016, para. 7). In particular, the website created by Nelson and O’Donovan (2003) seems to be of minimal relevance to the information outlined within the remainder of the unit. Nelson and O’Donovan’s (2003) website focuses on “female convicts” (para. 1), however, the unit’s (Maxwell, Burke, & Salton, 2016b) assessment task tends to be more male dominated as it outlines that students are required to write a narrative from the perspective of a “Convict, Explorer, Settler [or] Soldier” (Maxwell, Burke, & Salton, 2016b, p. 6). Additionally, this unit (Maxwell, Burke, & Salton, 2016b) also uses both Reed’s (1968) “Oliver!” film, and Donner’s (1982) “Oliver Twist” film. Even though both of these films provide information in regards to life