In their own voice: The role of the Shape of the Australian Curriculum: The Arts Paper Writers in ensuring equitable access to quality Arts education in Australia

Abstract

This paper examines the personal and professional experiences of the five arts leaders who co-wrote the foundation document for Australia's first national curriculum in the Arts. Their personal and professional backgrounds, which were explored during in depth interviews, drove the complex collaborative process that informed the first iteration of the Australian Curriculum: The Arts. Though each couched their responses in the context of their background and arts discipline, they shared an awareness of the important role of the Arts in providing the analytical tools for children and young people to identify and subsequently challenge social injustice. The findings, which are presented as a group narrative using a Narrative Inquiry approach, reveal how the five arts leaders' individual lived experience, disciplinary experience and expertise, and commitment to collaborative leadership informed their approach. It was one driven by their shared belief that all Australian students, regardless of their background, are entitled to a quality arts education.

The very marrow of the national idea: The Frontier Wars and the Australian curriculum

“…The development of the Australian Curriculum has attracted the attention of numerous researchers, including Baguley et al (2021) Brennan (2011), Ditchburn (2012), Gerrard and Farrell (2013), Harris-Hart (2010), Marsh (1994), Reid (2005Reid ( , 2019, and Yates et al (2011). As these researchers found, a nationally mandated curriculum inevitably confronts significant challenges (Apple, 1993;Brennan, 2011) that reflect "a range of social, political and economic imperatives and ideological positions" (Savage, 2016, p. 868).…”

“…It is further problematised in the Australian context by a demarcation dispute. The state and territory governments retained constitutional responsibility for schooling after Federation in 1901, one that they have often proved unwilling to either share or surrender to the federal government (Baguley et al, 2021). Nevertheless, from the late 1960s and 1970s, successive federal governments increasingly began to encroach on this prerogative (Kennedy, et al, 1995).…”