Post by Kiwi Frontline on May 21, 2021 11:13:43 GMT 12
SUBMISSION ON NEW ZEALAND HISTORY IN THE NEW ZEALAND CURRICULUM – by Roger Childs.
As probably the key element in the He Puapua strategy designed to achieve joint Maori-Crown sovereignty by 2040, the proposed curriculum is hugely important. I would urge readers, if they haven’t already, to make a submission. Feel free to use anything from my effort, if it helps. You have until May 31.
The curriculum statement can be found on file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/CO2716_MOE_Aotearoa_NZ_Histories_A3_FINAL-020%20(21).pdf
The font is small so I decided to get it enlarged on A3.
GENERAL COMMENTS
** When it was first announced that New Zealand History would become compulsory for Year 1-10 students, respected historian Paul Moon remarked that a “warts and all” approach was essential. Moon observed: Of course, there are risks that if done poorly, compulsory history in our schools could veer in to the realm of indoctrination. Unfortunately the developers have fallen into that trap.
** The draft document reads more like a syllabus statement for Maori Studies than a blueprint for our youngsters studying the history of their country. Of course the coverage of Maori history is important, but should not dominate. About 80% of the students who will be learning New Zealand History in schools from 2022 on, are non-Maori and the rest all have some non-Maori forebears.
** The language of the document is loaded with too many unsubstantiated opinions and value judgements eg Colonisation began as part of a world-wide imperial project. The Greeks, Romans, Incas, Chinese, Mongols, Persians and other peoples were all imperialists a thousand and more years ago, long before modern European powers built empires.
** Many statements come across as emphatic truths, but are in fact debatable opinions. For example big idea number one: Maori history is the foundational and continuous history of Aotearoa New Zealand. (See more below.)
** The draft is also very complex, contorted and wordy, and students would struggle to understand the language in many sections, especially the “progress outcomes” – I know …, I have …, I can …
** There seems to be a fixation with sets of three – ideas, national contexts, rohe and local contexts, inquiry practices, key understandings – which makes for a straightjacket, especially when there are more elements which should be included. (See the next section.)
** Take the three big ideas which I will analyze in more detail later. There are a large number of key ideas in our history eg we are a nation of immigrants and different groups have contributed elements of their traditions and beliefs to the rich tapestry which makes up New Zealand culture today.
** Aotearoa is not the Maori word for New Zealand, Nu Tirani is. Aotearoa was never used by Maori before the 20th century and does not feature in Te Rangi Hiroa’s or James Cowan’s books. It was probably invented by a British settler. And as you are well aware, New Zealand was never a united Polynesian nation despite what the He Tohu exhibition at the National Library says.
** In breaking down the learning into Understand / Know / Do you neglect the vital elements of skills and fundamental historical understandings. Some skills get a mention in the “Do” segment such as interpretation, but many are absent eg comprehension, perception, analysis, synthesis.
SPECIFIC OBSERVATIONS
The Three Big Ideas:
These are loaded with reference to Maori – a word not used until the 1840s – their experiences and how they were adversely affected by colonization and the exercise of power.
The process of colonisation in fact brought many benefits for Maori – ending slavery, cannibalism, killing prisoners, female infanticide and abducting women. Not to mention a major increase in life expectancy, improvements in standards of living and a broadening of lifestyle experiences.
Some specific thoughts on the “big ideas”.....
Continue reading here > www.nzcpr.com/submission-on-new-zealand-history-in-the-new-zealand-curriculum/#more-34904
As probably the key element in the He Puapua strategy designed to achieve joint Maori-Crown sovereignty by 2040, the proposed curriculum is hugely important. I would urge readers, if they haven’t already, to make a submission. Feel free to use anything from my effort, if it helps. You have until May 31.
The curriculum statement can be found on file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/CO2716_MOE_Aotearoa_NZ_Histories_A3_FINAL-020%20(21).pdf
The font is small so I decided to get it enlarged on A3.
GENERAL COMMENTS
** When it was first announced that New Zealand History would become compulsory for Year 1-10 students, respected historian Paul Moon remarked that a “warts and all” approach was essential. Moon observed: Of course, there are risks that if done poorly, compulsory history in our schools could veer in to the realm of indoctrination. Unfortunately the developers have fallen into that trap.
** The draft document reads more like a syllabus statement for Maori Studies than a blueprint for our youngsters studying the history of their country. Of course the coverage of Maori history is important, but should not dominate. About 80% of the students who will be learning New Zealand History in schools from 2022 on, are non-Maori and the rest all have some non-Maori forebears.
** The language of the document is loaded with too many unsubstantiated opinions and value judgements eg Colonisation began as part of a world-wide imperial project. The Greeks, Romans, Incas, Chinese, Mongols, Persians and other peoples were all imperialists a thousand and more years ago, long before modern European powers built empires.
** Many statements come across as emphatic truths, but are in fact debatable opinions. For example big idea number one: Maori history is the foundational and continuous history of Aotearoa New Zealand. (See more below.)
** The draft is also very complex, contorted and wordy, and students would struggle to understand the language in many sections, especially the “progress outcomes” – I know …, I have …, I can …
** There seems to be a fixation with sets of three – ideas, national contexts, rohe and local contexts, inquiry practices, key understandings – which makes for a straightjacket, especially when there are more elements which should be included. (See the next section.)
** Take the three big ideas which I will analyze in more detail later. There are a large number of key ideas in our history eg we are a nation of immigrants and different groups have contributed elements of their traditions and beliefs to the rich tapestry which makes up New Zealand culture today.
** Aotearoa is not the Maori word for New Zealand, Nu Tirani is. Aotearoa was never used by Maori before the 20th century and does not feature in Te Rangi Hiroa’s or James Cowan’s books. It was probably invented by a British settler. And as you are well aware, New Zealand was never a united Polynesian nation despite what the He Tohu exhibition at the National Library says.
** In breaking down the learning into Understand / Know / Do you neglect the vital elements of skills and fundamental historical understandings. Some skills get a mention in the “Do” segment such as interpretation, but many are absent eg comprehension, perception, analysis, synthesis.
SPECIFIC OBSERVATIONS
The Three Big Ideas:
These are loaded with reference to Maori – a word not used until the 1840s – their experiences and how they were adversely affected by colonization and the exercise of power.
The process of colonisation in fact brought many benefits for Maori – ending slavery, cannibalism, killing prisoners, female infanticide and abducting women. Not to mention a major increase in life expectancy, improvements in standards of living and a broadening of lifestyle experiences.
Some specific thoughts on the “big ideas”.....
Continue reading here > www.nzcpr.com/submission-on-new-zealand-history-in-the-new-zealand-curriculum/#more-34904