Fixing the hole in Australian education The Australian Curriculum benchmarked against the best By Ben Jensen, Mailie Ross, Michael Collett, Nicole Murnane and Emily Pearson November 2023

 https://learningfirst.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/FULL-REPORT-COMBINED.pdf

Fixing the hole in Australian education The Australian Curriculum benchmarked against the best By Ben Jensen, Mailie Ross, Michael Collett, Nicole Murnane and Emily Pearson November 2023

Q: summarise while paying attention to Singapore . highlight any learning on the strengths and weaknesses

A:The report extensively analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of the Australian Curriculum, especially in the context of science education, and compares it with curriculums from high-performing and comparable systems globally, including Singapore. The main findings and recommendations from this analysis are:

### Key Findings:

1. **Lack of Content**: The Australian science curriculum significantly lacks in both breadth and depth of content compared to other systems, covering about half the science content of the average of other curriculums from Foundation to Year 8.

2. **Poor Sequencing and Lack of Specificity**: The sequencing of content in the Australian Curriculum is poor, with many topics introduced later than in other systems, and it lacks specificity, making it difficult for teachers to understand what to teach and assess.

3. **Optional Content Problem**: A substantial portion of the curriculum content is optional, which further erodes the curriculum entitlement of Australian students and leads to inconsistencies in what students learn.

4. **Impact on Student Performance**: Since the introduction of the Australian Curriculum, there has been a decline in student performance in international assessments, such as PISA, with Australian students performing nearly a year below their peers from 2009 in science.

### Singapore's Strengths:

The benchmarking process highlighted the strengths of curriculums like Singapore's, which includes a detailed, sequential approach to curriculum content, ensuring depth and breadth of knowledge, and providing clarity on what needs to be taught and assessed. This approach contrasts with the issues identified in the Australian Curriculum, showcasing the importance of a well-structured and comprehensive curriculum in achieving high student performance.

### Recommendations for Australia:

1. **Overhaul of the Australian Curriculum**: A comprehensive rewriting, moving away from minor amendments to address the systemic issues of content lack, poor sequencing, and lack of specificity.

2. **Adoption of New Development Processes**: Ensuring the curriculum is built on comprehensive research, benchmarking, and mapping to guarantee a world-class curriculum.

3. **Focus on Curriculum Entitlement**: Establishing a clear and public curriculum entitlement that guarantees all Australian students the right to learn strong curriculum content, comparable to students in other high-performing systems.

4. **Detailed Implementation and Monitoring**: Implementing the new curriculum with minimal disruption while ensuring detailed monitoring and evaluation of its impact on student learning and equity.

The report emphasizes the urgent need for reform in the Australian Curriculum to address the identified weaknesses and align with practices from high-performing education systems like Singapore. This involves a fundamental shift in how the curriculum is developed, implemented, and evaluated, ensuring all Australian students receive a quality education that prepares them for future challenges【3†source】.

this report can it be used by singapore to identify strength and weakness, for singapore

The report primarily focuses on analyzing and highlighting the weaknesses of the Australian Curriculum, especially in the context of science education, and draws comparisons with other high-performing and comparable education systems around the world, including Singapore. While the detailed comparison offers insights into the strengths of these other systems, including Singapore's, the report is not explicitly designed to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the Singaporean curriculum itself. Instead, it uses Singapore as a benchmark to underline where the Australian Curriculum might be falling short.

However, Singapore can still derive valuable insights from this report in several indirect ways:

1. **Benchmarking Validation**: Seeing its curriculum practices positively highlighted in international comparisons can validate the current approaches and strategies Singapore employs in its education system. This recognition could reinforce the strengths of the Singaporean curriculum, encouraging the continuation and further refinement of effective practices.

2. **Identifying Implicit Strengths**: By understanding the criteria and specific areas where the Australian Curriculum is deemed to lack (such as content depth and breadth, sequencing, and specificity), Singaporean education policymakers can indirectly gauge the strengths of their own system. If these areas are well-addressed within Singapore's curriculum, it points towards inherent strengths relative to the issues identified in the Australian context.

3. **Areas for Continuous Improvement**: Any international comparison or benchmarking exercise also opens avenues for reflection on one's own system. Singapore can use the findings as a lens to scrutinize its own curriculum further, identifying areas not just of strength but also potential improvement, even if they're already performing well in comparison to Australia.

4. **Global Education Trends and Insights**: The report's recommendations for Australia, based on best practices and lessons drawn from high-performing systems, could also offer Singapore ideas for innovation and continuous improvement in its own curriculum development and implementation processes.

5. **Focus on Equity and Curriculum Entitlement**: One of the report's critical discussions revolves around ensuring all students have access to a comprehensive, high-quality curriculum. This aspect of the report can serve as a reminder for Singapore to continuously monitor and enhance equity in educational access and outcomes, ensuring that high standards are uniformly met across the diverse student population.

In summary, while the report is not specifically designed to assess Singapore's educational strengths and weaknesses, it indirectly offers a mirror through which Singapore can reflect on its own system's effectiveness. It highlights areas where Singapore is performing well and suggests a continuous path for reflection and improvement in ensuring a world-class education for its students.

Q: give 3 examples of what are these area of improvement for Singapore 

A: While the report itself primarily focuses on the Australian Curriculum's shortcomings compared to high-performing education systems, including Singapore, it does not explicitly detail areas of improvement for Singapore. However, based on the context of the report's findings and general principles for educational excellence, we can infer potential areas for continuous improvement that Singapore (or indeed any high-performing education system) might consider:

1. **Integration of Technology in Curriculum**: As technology continues to evolve rapidly, there is an ongoing need for education systems to integrate current technologies and digital literacy into their curriculums comprehensively. For Singapore, an area of improvement could involve continuously updating and embedding technology in curriculum content, teaching methods, and student assessments. This includes coding, digital ethics, and critical information literacy to prepare students for a digital future.

2. **Emphasis on Soft Skills and Holistic Education**: While Singapore's education system is renowned for its academic rigor and excellence in science and mathematics, continuous improvement can be made in integrating soft skills such as creativity, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration more deeply into the curriculum. Strengthening education in the arts, physical education, and social studies can provide a more holistic education that prepares students for the complexities of modern life and work.

3. **Customization and Flexibility in Learning**: Recognizing and catering to the diverse learning needs and interests of students can be an area for improvement. Singapore could further enhance its curriculum by offering more personalized learning pathways and greater flexibility in subject selection, especially at the secondary level. This could involve expanding elective options, offering modular courses, and promoting interdisciplinary studies that allow students to tailor their education to their interests and career aspirations.

These suggested areas are not necessarily shortcomings but rather opportunities for Singapore to continue leading in education innovation and adaptability. Continuously addressing these areas can help ensure that the education system not only maintains its high standards but also evolves with changing global trends, technologies, and societal needs.