History curriculum perpetuates East Timor myths

10 July 2012

This month the Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority completes its consultation on the draft senior secondary Australian Curriculum for English, Mathematics, Science and History.

Although I applaud the inclusion of two mentions of East Timor in the Draft of the Australian Senior Secondary Modern History Curriculum, I believe that the history of the relationship between Australia and Timor-Leste is not sufficiently represented.

Any teacher wanting to teach East Timor in the Curriculum unit 'Movements for Rights and Recognition in the 20th Century' would find investigation points which rightly outline the global forces affecting the many countries and issues suggested for study. But in the case of East Timor, omitting any specific mention of Australia’s role could easily lead to false impressions.

Many people’s opinions are shaped by notions championed by various political forces and media, and therefore some actually believe that regarding East Timor, Australia has been unremittingly courageous, generous and exemplary. That Australian soldiers went into Portuguese Timor in 1941 ‘to protect the Timorese’, for example, and that Australia ‘saved’ East Timor in 1999. A study of the history would allow students to have these perceptions challenged by examination of the facts.

If Australia’s relationship with East Timor was given prominence, students would be able to fulfil the other aims of the curriculum i.e. how to inquire, how to use sources and how to defend well-researched positions, all by using a line of inquiry which has relevance to the place of Australia in the modern world and in this region in particular.

In 'Unit 4 'The Modern World Since 1945' East Timor again appears as one among others in a study of 'Movements of People', which refers to conflict and persecution in 1975 and 1999. Without specific reference to Australia’s role, however, the tendency to portray Australia as the champion may not only remain unchallenged, but may be strengthened.

It is true that students can transfer historical skills learned with respect to one set of material to other content. But transference of skills could be as adequately served if the Australia/Timor relationship was included as a choice, for example, in Unit 4 of the 'Engagement with Asia' section. Students could learn their skills in relation to Timor’s history and so be equipped to understand Vietnam, or indeed, cultural and sporting ties with Asia, topics for which the present Draft Curriculum provides.

If students are to engage in valid participation in contemporary debates, they

INTERNATIONAL

History curriculum perpetuates East Timor myths

Subscriber login