Premium
Distorted representations of the ‘capability approach’ in Australian school education
Author(s) -
Skourdoumbis Andrew
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
the curriculum journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.843
H-Index - 36
eISSN - 1469-3704
pISSN - 0958-5176
DOI - 10.1080/09585176.2014.955512
Subject(s) - curriculum , contradiction , prosperity , sociology , national curriculum , meaning (existential) , curriculum theory , curriculum studies , epistemology , australian curriculum , pedagogy , curriculum development , engineering ethics , social science , political science , law , engineering , project commissioning , philosophy , publishing
Recently, curriculum developments in Australia have seen the incorporation of functionalist ‘general capabilities’ as essential markers of schooling, meaning that any pedagogical expression of classroom‐based practice, including subsequent instruction, should entail the identification and development of operational general capabilities. The paper questions and critiques recent curriculum developments in Australia that characterises capabilities purely in functionalist terms, something that the broader capabilities literature eschews. The analysis is informed by aspects of the theoretical frameworks of Martin Heidegger and Pierre Bourdieu. It examines the notion of ‘general capabilities’ in the Australian Curriculum. The paper argues that there is an inherent contradiction in Australian education policy, namely a vocationally oriented national school curriculum with implied functionings that cannot fulfil designated purposes. The paper finds that the curriculum%s connection to increased individual and national economic prosperity, one championing ‘jobs and careers of the twenty‐first century’, is evident, although current populous forms and categories of employment seem to suggest otherwise.