Templestowe College: Changing the traditional curriculum?

[pi]

So I came across this with more on it here:

The tldr for someone without 15min to watch:
- This is happening at Templestowe College right now, which is a high school that traditionally caters for Years 7-12
- No more "Years", students entering the school (Year 5s or Year 6s) will join an "entry class", which is a common year that can have traditional Year 7s, Years 8s, etc who are at that academic level (the level is pitched at a traditional Year 8 level)
- After this "entry class" it's a free-for-all, students can pick from a grid of subjects: non-VCE subjects (high school maths, random projects, etc.), VCE subjects, Uni Extension (if prerqs met) etc. eg. a traditional Year 8 could do VCE 1/2 subjects and start their 3/4 sequences from traditional Year 9 and on-wards until they want to graduate (ie. high school could last as short as 4 years)*
- Students are involved in selection of teachers, they actually interview them (another panel of principal and senior teachers also conduct an interview too)

*This doesn't seem to be unusual for the keen beans of AN Class of 2018 though :P

What are your thoughts on this?

[keltingmeith]

The system has merit - too often kids are shunted for either not being able to learn fast enough, and being made to learn too fast. Regardless of which the kid experience, it is harmful - whether the student can't keep up with their classmates, and so feels bad because their grades are suffering, but they are expected to be able to do as well as their peers. Or even the reverse situation - one is being unable to stretch their own mind enough, because they're constantly held down and not allowed to expand into further concepts (I'm looking at you, years 7-10 algebra...)

The fact is that what TC is doing is different, though. There will be nay-sayers, quoting years of research against TC, and there will be those that say it's a step in the wrong direction. However, the biggest thing to really take away is what this really is - it is a step in a direction. This is certainly a system that will be detrimental to some students, but it is also a system that will help many students, and the important thing is to go into it with an open mind and not walk in with prejudices, whether they be bad or good.

Personally, I think the system is amazing - just remove VCE altogether and I'll love it even more. Except then's the question of how to handle university entrance, and I'd probably hate a Japanese system more than the current ATAR...

[pi]

I'm not totally for it, but I do like some aspects.

I like the idea of starting VCE subjects earlier, but I don't want to compromise "years" and the "normal" school subjects such as high school maths, science, english, history, PE, etc. I'd be in favour of a system allowing students to accelerate up to 2 subjects, starting the 1/2s in Year 9, and another 2 in Year 10 (with options of repeating).

So for example:
Year 9: 1/2 English, 1/2 Methods, yr9 Science, yr9 PE, yr9 History, yr9 Geo, yr9 Art etc
Year 10: 3/4 English, 3/4 Methods, 1/2 GMA, 1/2 Chem, yr10 PE, yr10 History, etc
Year 11: 3/4 English (repeat, for example), 3/4 Spesh, 3/4 Chem, 1/2 Physics, 1/2 Economics
Year 12: 3/4 Physics, 3/4 Economics, 3/4 Biology, uni Chem

I'd be in favour of something like that. Would be a timetabling nightmare for schools though.

[spectroscopy]

yeah pi i agree with you on that
i really dont think you schools should compromise things like secondary history and science and even PE because theyre a part of a well rounded education
the system would be good if there were still requirements, like "2 years of PE/health" "2 years of a history" "3 years of math" and that sort of thing, so that way you could do it as a yr 9 or 10 subject, or instead you could take it as a vce subject later on if you wanted to explore other things in earlier years, or yolo it and do said subject every year

im generally really liking the system though. it would be a pain to timetable but would be absolutely AWESOME to partake in. in things like science my productivity peaked in year 10 and if i were doing a vce subject at the time i probably wouldve done better in it than any of the study scores i ended up getting lmao

[vobinhood]

I think the whole personal project concept is amazing. It gives students the freedom to learn what they please with the support of the school. This nurtures and gives value to the innovative ideas they may have and their passions - rather than suppressing them as the traditional system does.
Additionally, schools should include a 'show and tell' talk on a regular basis where students can talk to their peers and teachers about the project they're working on and their goals and aspirations in regards to it.
This would really help them explore concepts and receive feedback on how to improve/look at the idea from different points of view etc.

[99.90 pls]

Let's step away from the leftist utopia for a second though. The programme is targeted towards the "bottom third". Do you realistically think that most of these students would design a programme which is anything more than a "chill bludge"?

Regardless of what school you go to, socioeconomic background etc, there are always going to be kids looking for a bludge. More often than not, these are the kids in the "bottom third". Most of us are guilty of it too; we've all picked electives or classes in the past for the sole reason of "bludging", rather than interest in the subject.

What's more, are Year 9 kids really best placed to know what they want for their future? Of fucking course they all said "game design"; but the notion of 600 code monkeys flooding the industry and all managing to find a job, prosper and live happily ever after is something out of a Marxist fairytale. Currently, the lead up to VCE are valuable years which allow students to gain a more holistic world view before making INFORMED decisions.

Not to mention that what he is proposing already exists. VCE. Hundreds of subjects for you to choose from, covering a huuuuuuuge spectrum, all cross-compatible in terms of contributing to the ATAR thanks to VTAC's nifty scaling system.

We always blame the system for our own shortcomings. It's not the system's fault. The system is bloody fine. The issue originates from places far deeper than the education system, such as parenting, a culture addicted to instant gratification, and a generally lackadaisical attitude towards study and work in general.

[pi]

I'm not too sure about generalising people who are "in the bottom third" (perhaps a topic for another day?), but I tend to agree with '99.90 pls'. I think a "free for all" system for kids who are 12/13/14 isn't the best idea. I'm in favour of schools providing structure and a general academic direction to their students to achieve a holistic baseline education by yr10, but I don't mind a bit of extension for those who are keen and able.

[keltingmeith]

I feel like you're not giving these students enough credit. Yes, it is true that they are just kids who don't know what they want out of life, but why should we restrict youths based on a curriculum both small and stifling? You may argue that VCE has plenty of subjects to cater for one's interests, but then how is it that FIRST YEAR UNIVERSITY has more than double the amount of subjects available to a student than VCE can offer? This is even including the subjects they've essentially doubled up, just to "cater" for different skill levels (foundation/general maths, methods/specialist, music investigation/performance).

No, this curriculum does more than just supply an education which is both welcoming to students, and diversive enough to keep them interested. This curriculum gives POWER to the children.

In a world where couples buying a house get to have a say in what the house is like, a world where a patron chooses their meal at the restaurant, and the music listener decides on which bands they listen to, does it not seem strange that a student has almost no say in what they study? Sure, they can choose what things they'd like to study, but it's basically akin to being told you must eat at a seafood restaurant, and then being given a limited menu. Or even being told you must spend your life listening to punk rock, and thus being limited to whatever bands play music in the genre.

By giving students the power to control the curriculum, as this school is doing, it's leading a paradigm shift from what is usually consented as strange to something more normal. This is the TRUE beauty of the system - not in that it can help students accelerate, or giving them more to choose from. It's a system in which the consumer is truly allowed to choose and shape what they consume, which is how any good marketing system is designed.

[Russ]

You're making the assumption that consumers (14 year old kids in this case) are rational and informed. This seems like an interesting modification to the system, especially in allowing flexible projects in areas of interest, but I'm hardly convinced it's well designed.

[brenden]

You're making the assumption that consumers (14 year old kids in this case) are rational and informed. This seems like an interesting modification to the system, especially in allowing flexible projects in areas of interest, but I'm hardly convinced it's well designed.

Yeah but people who design the the education system aren't rational anyway so there's no waste.

Edit: was using rationality in a different sense to Russ to be cheeky. In hindsight it was probably a monumental fail of a joke. I''ll be off now.

[Russ]

You're right, they're probably or

[99.90 pls]

I feel like you're not giving these students enough credit. Yes, it is true that they are just kids who don't know what they want out of life, but why should we restrict youths based on a curriculum both small and stifling? You may argue that VCE has plenty of subjects to cater for one's interests, but then how is it that FIRST YEAR UNIVERSITY has more than double the amount of subjects available to a student than VCE can offer? This is even including the subjects they've essentially doubled up, just to "cater" for different skill levels (foundation/general maths, methods/specialist, music investigation/performance).

VCE covers a large enough range of subjects already. They even have Dance and Furniture Making, for crying out loud. The system is fine as it is. An inability to take an interest in (or at least try to take an interest in) at least a few of the hundreds of subjects offered is indicative of a personal issue rather than an issue with the system. Don't forget, VCAL is there too for 'practical' interests.

.... does it not seem strange that a student has almost no say in what they study? Sure, they can choose what things they'd like to study, but it's basically akin to being told you must eat at a seafood restaurant, and then being given a limited menu. Or even being told you must spend your life listening to punk rock, and thus being limited to whatever bands play music in the genre.

That's preposterous. You're telling me that being offered hundreds of subjects, ranging from Specialist Maths to Horticulture to LOTE is "akin to being told you must eat a seafood restaurant" and other equally inappropriate analogies? VCE is a blessing, in comparison to secondary schooling in most other countries.

What you're saying is indicative of a systemic tendency to blame higher authorities regardless of the circumstances, thus shifting responsibility from ourselves to some arbitrary punching bag. This is exactly the kind of societal attitude which fosters the growth and acceptance of the "bottom third". It's never my fault, it's always someone else's fault.

By giving students the power to control the curriculum, as this school is doing, it's leading a paradigm shift from what is usually consented as strange to something more normal. This is the TRUE beauty of the system - not in that it can help students accelerate, or giving them more to choose from. It's a system in which the consumer is truly allowed to choose and shape what they consume, which is how any good marketing system is designed.

Being given the ability to pick every subject you do (barring English, and even then, you get three choices) for the final two years of secondary schooling is not enough "[choice]"? Ridiculous.

And it's interesting how you keep referring to education as a product/service and to students as "consumers". Since when did education become a commercial venture? Education is a privilege; we should be making the most of it, rather than acting like entitled brats. Consumer rights have nothing to do with this.

[dyskontent]

What you're saying is indicative of a systemic tendency to blame higher authorities regardless of the circumstances, thus shifting responsibility from ourselves to some arbitrary punching bag. This is exactly the kind of societal attitude which fosters the growth and acceptance of the "bottom third". It's never my fault, it's always someone else's fault.

While one's acceptance of the current system and refusal to make any attempts at improvement are the reason why our education levels compared to the rest of the world are slipping. It seems quite presumptuous to assume that because this system works for me, that it is therefore the best system and anyone who doesn't like it is just looking for someone else to blame / has a 'personal' issue.

For the people who go to elite private schools / selective high schools, it's easy to support the system a system that they benefit from; seeing as the majority of people that get 99+ ATARs go to these schools. The fact is that it is okay to be a passive learner, following a rigid curriculum in these caring, high quality environments because the majority of the teachers are good and the spoon-feeding is ubiquitous. In schools where students often do not have access to the best quality teachers / facilities, being a passive learner means that you fall behind, in asking students to be responsible for their own learning is to encourage the students to feel that they have a personal stake in their own education, rather than being forced into doing something by the high school system. I think it has to be emphasized that education is for the student, so the student should be able to have a greater say in what they learn.

Of course I'm not saying that the curriculum at TC should be implemented everywhere, but the fact that it is being attempted should be cause for encouragement as it provides an alternative to the overwhelming majority of schools that follow a strict curriculum, and can cater to students who would otherwise suffer in a regular school.

VCE covers a large enough range of subjects already. They even have Dance and Furniture Making, for crying out loud. The system is fine as it is. An inability to take an interest in (or at least try to take an interest in) at least a few of the hundreds of subjects offered is indicative of a personal issue rather than an issue with the system. Don't forget, VCAL is there too for 'practical' interests.

While this may be true, the fact is that the vast majority of these subjects are not offered at many schools. And the issue of choice doesn't extend to what subjects you can choose, (after all the VCE curriculum effectively covers all the major areas of study), but when you can undertake these studies. In basically every other school, 3/4 subjects can only be taken in Year 12 and a few in Year 11; but what about the talented mathematicians that would be more than capable of taking Maths Methods in Year 10 or even Year 9, but are instead forced to delay their mathematical learning until Year 12 - as a MHS student I'm sure you know that having to take methods in Year 12 isn't something that suits people who would be more than capable of doing methods earlier. What we are effectively doing is stunting students mathematical learning for 2 or more years just so they don't disturb the system. If students are capable of doing subjects earlier on they should be more than able to, not doing so is wasting their time as well as probably instilling a boredom of the subject as they are forced to listen to material that they have already learnt.

As for VCE being a 'blessing' in comparison to other countries.
I'd firstly like to say that what TC is proposing isn't to get rid of VCE but instead to cater a students individual desires / talents to best be able to tackle VCE. Furthermore, while compared to some countries we may have a more varied curriculum; in countries such as the US (which is severely lacking in education in some areas, so I'm sure as hell not advocating a US system), students are able to subjects at whatever level is suitable, often being able to take multiple first or second year university subjects at the local university if they are capable.

[keltingmeith]

You're making the assumption that consumers (14 year old kids in this case) are rational and informed. This seems like an interesting modification to the system, especially in allowing flexible projects in areas of interest, but I'm hardly convinced it's well designed.

As I said earlier, I don't think you're giving them enough credit. Sure, they're 14 years old - but they know what they want. Sure, they might not be willing to accept that to make video games you need maths, or that they can't actually speak their own language as well as they think they can, but that's why they have parents and teachers to help guide them. The fact of the matter is, even in a normal school, OLDER kids make these faulty decisions (ever counted the amount of year 12s saying they didn't do methods because they didn't realise they needed it for commerce?), so what's wrong in letting the 14 year olds have more input? At least let them make the mistake of what they think being a video game designer is earlier, BEFORE their VCE subject selection (when they gotta choose those uni pre-reqs...).

VCE covers a large enough range of subjects already. They even have Dance and Furniture Making, for crying out loud. The system is fine as it is. An inability to take an interest in (or at least try to take an interest in) at least a few of the hundreds of subjects offered is indicative of a personal issue rather than an issue with the system. Don't forget, VCAL is there too for 'practical' interests.

You say that, but have you truly looked past VCE as to what COULD be offered? What about looking at the aspects of video game making? "oh but they have multimedia and software development", so a student should be forced to forego an entire subject just because there's ASPECTS of two which suit their needs? Or learning about US/UK history? Last I checked, there was nothing about vikings or the anglosaxons covered in VCE history. And don't even get me STARTED on the amount of sciences offered in VCE... No, "chemistry, biology, physics and environmental science" ISN'T plenty. It's like saying the only ice-cream flavours are vanilla, chocolate, strawberry and banana.

That's preposterous. You're telling me that being offered hundreds of subjects, ranging from Specialist Maths to Horticulture to LOTE is "akin to being told you must eat a seafood restaurant" and other equally inappropriate analogies? VCE is a blessing, in comparison to secondary schooling in most other countries.

Yes. I am. Look up. And just because we have it better than most countries, doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to do better. Our economy is a lot better off than any third world countries, too, but we're still trying to improve that.

What you're saying is indicative of a systemic tendency to blame higher authorities regardless of the circumstances, thus shifting responsibility from ourselves to some arbitrary punching bag. This is exactly the kind of societal attitude which fosters the growth and acceptance of the "bottom third". It's never my fault, it's always someone else's fault.

Honestly, I feel like you're just having fun by picking on said "bottom third", just for the fucking sake of it. Y'know what? I've met this "bottom third", I've been friends with this "bottom third", and they will admit themselves that they might not be the brightest of the bunch, but EVEN THEY can see that school isn't *trying* to be interested in them, so why should they be interested in it? Would you ever buy a dress/suit that doesn't look nice? Just because school is interesting to you, doesn't mean there's a problem with everyone else because they can't get it to be interesting for them.

Being given the ability to pick every subject you do (barring English, and even then, you get three choices) for the final two years of secondary schooling is not enough "[choice]"? Ridiculous.

Nope. Not at all - glad you can see where I'm coming from. And it's not ridiculous, far from it - if you could choose whatever job you wanted (oh wait - you can do that!), but only given the choice of *obvious* careers, how would you feel? Hell, the entire job of "scientist" almost goes out the window ENTIRELY if you had a system like this, and don't even get me STARTED on what happens to teaching with no "teaching" VCE subject. (on this, why shouldn't there be a VCE subject based on learning - both teaching kids how they can best learn, but also the best way to help others learn)

And it's interesting how you keep referring to education as a product/service and to students as "consumers". Since when did education become a commercial venture? Education is a privilege; we should be making the most of it, rather than acting like entitled brats. Consumer rights have nothing to do with this.

Y'know what, getting food is a priviledge, so I think we should all just eat the cheapest food ever. Screw all the people with jobs that are constantly trying to improve their product so that they can KEEP THOSE JOBS.

[pi]

As I said earlier, I don't think you're giving them enough credit. Sure, they're 14 years old - but they know what they want. Sure, they might not be willing to accept that to make video games you need maths, or that they can't actually speak their own language as well as they think they can, but that's why they have parents and teachers to help guide them. The fact of the matter is, even in a normal school, OLDER kids make these faulty decisions (ever counted the amount of year 12s saying they didn't do methods because they didn't realise they needed it for commerce?), so what's wrong in letting the 14 year olds have more input? At least let them make the mistake of what they think being a video game designer is earlier, BEFORE their VCE subject selection (when they gotta choose those uni pre-reqs...).

I think the fact that "OLDER kids" make regrettable decisions is more of a reason to restrict this "academic freedom" from younger students.

Seeing as though we're using analogies for every point here, 18 year olds statistically make some of the worst decisions as P-platers, let's let 14 year olds hit the roads solo too?

I'm not against giving 14 years olds more choice, but I'm not sure they need or should have as much as TC is giving them. In the current system (or at least when I was say, 14) I had my core subjects of maths/english/science/history/geo/PE and then a bunch of elective spots (IT/flight technology/woodwork/textiles/mentalwork/vis comm/etc etc). I don't think that system, ie. the current system, is lacking in that regard to variety. Having said that, I don't think it caters enough for academically able students well enough in regard to starting VCE early (as I've mentioned twice now), that would be my only criticism.

I don't think comparing high school to university is a fair or relevant comparison. One is for minors, one is for adults. One is where parents have a high input, one is where it's mostly the student calling the shots. One is a gateway to careers, one is designed to provide a foundation for a broad range of subjects. I don't think there's any need to "tailor" your schooling*by doing obscure sciences (say, astronomy) just because they 'exist' in the 'real world'. School is obviously /not/ the real world, and it isn't supposed to be. Having said that, if we can improve the content in the subjects we have, I'm all for that. But I don't see the need to revamp the system to cater for every little interest, there's plenty of time for that once you've got an educational base to stand on.

*and let alone the terrifying potential scenario of "super keen parents tailoring their child's schooling from 14 years of age to complete 15 VCE subjects for the perfect score simply because the school will let them" (way to talk about ruining a childhood)