Wikipedia entry on the historiography of the crusades - again, useful links at the bottom.

Wikipedia entry on the Crusades - has some useful links at the bottom.

Yeah as far as I can see it's going to be very similar to what we do already, just with a slightly different structure and form. For example, we have Stages 4, 5 and 6 in years 7-12 which state what kids should have achieved by the end of each stage e.g. by the end of year 8 students should have covered the content and skills outlined in the Stage 4 syllabus etc.

I like the idea that there will be more senior history subjects too! I went to a conference the other week where eveyrone was wondering what happened to the Asia-Pacific, World, Medieval etc history subjects from the papers presented by the NCB and it was basically because there was little feedback on the original suggestions....though we replied...well had we had more than just titles of the courses we may have had more to give feedback on!

I really dont think it will look or sound or feel too much different to the current NSW courses, but with a bit more choice and flexibility (and mandatory history for states/territories who don't already have it). There is a LOT of suspicion and resistance to anything but a very good system...but to be honest I think it's such a no brainer to have a national curriculum in Australia that if it doesn't get up I'll be utterly disappointed. The thing stopping itowuld be the parochialism of state-based education departments and bureaucrats.The feeling I get from all teachers is that we want it and its a good thing, but I think that the idea of having to streamline and collaborate may seem like armageddon to some Ed Departments.....

Anyway I have hope and optimism because well I'd rather be teaching a truly national curriculum for my teaching career (I'm only 4th year out) than continuing to poke a dinosaur along for another 10-15!

In Year 11 students have to complete a research assignment that is mandated by the syllabus, however at our school we basically gave them the list of personalities they could study. I was pushing for more flexibility but the final decision was to give a list and dictate the terms (ie essay or speech - no multimedia/other forms of communication).

In Modern and Ancient History there has to be a certain % of research and source analysis and oly 40% of assessment is supposed to be 'examination style'. So for example my Modern class recently handed in a 25% research task on an element of society in Nazi germany. We chose the question and scope of topics.

History Extension offers students the chance to complete a completely individual, independent research task that culminates in a project worth 80% of their internal mark - including essay, bibliography, source analysis and process log - which I think is excellent for students who truly do like getting into the nuts and bolts of history (not just repeating what other people have said).

Ideally, I think, every history subject in the NC would have a component of independent research that students could pursue that is given significant allocation in terms of weighting towards their assessment marks. Obviously we aren't expecting honours level research, but I think we can at least offer students the opportunity to actually do the research themselves. On a topic they are interested in. It would take a fairly straight forward set of outcomes for students to be marked against, but I tihnk its crucial to allow students the opportunity to partake in active research and contribute something meaningful to history! This would be balanced with 'coursework' that would allow students without the gift for good research to still achieve the outcomes as appropriate.

Wow that's a lot of typing for a Sunday night!

-Matt