The subject experts appointed to the Abbott government's national curriculum review included several figures with close Coalition links who were chosen without any scrutiny from education officials.
University of Sydney poetry professor Barry Spurr, one of the specialist reviewers of the English curriculum, has been suspended from academic duties after leaked emails showed him referring to "abos", "mussies" and "chinky-poos".
Professor Spurr argued in his subject review that the impact of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander literature in Australia had been "minimal" and that there should be a greater focus on western civilisation in the curriculum.
The leaked emails have sparked accusations from Labor and the Greens that the appointment process for the subject experts – many of whom are quoted at length in the review to justify changes to the curriculum – lacked transparency and rigour.
Education Department officials told Senate estimates hearings on Wednesday that they did not scrutinise the qualifications of the subject specialists, who were paid $8250 each for their input, before they were appointed.
Education Minister Christopher Pyne said the subject experts were chosen by the two reviewers, Kevin Donnelly and Kenneth Wiltshire, with no input from him or his office.
Several of the 14 subject specialists chosen by Dr Donnelly and Professor Wiltshire had close links to the Coalition and conservative think tanks. These include:
- Griffith University professor Alex Robson, a former senior adviser to Coalition frontbencher Malcolm Turnbull, who was chosen to review the economics curriculum
- Griffith University professor Tony Makin, a strong critic of the Rudd government's response to the global financial crisis, was also chosen to review the economics curriculum
- University of Wollongong professor Greg Melleuish, a member of the academic advisory council for the Liberal Party-aligned Menzies Research Centre, was chosen to review the history curriculum
- Australian National University English teacher Fiona Mueller, a delegate at the 2012 National Party federal conference, was chosen to review the English curriculum.
Professors Robson, Makin and Melleuish are regular contributors to the free market Institute of Public Affairs and Centre for Independent Studies think tanks.
Australian Education Union Deputy Federal President Correna Haythorpe said there was a lack of political and ideological diversity among the subject specialists.
She also criticised the appointment of four subject reviewers from the private school sector and three from the Catholic education sector. The only subject reviewer from the public school sector was Michele Chigwidden, a primary school arts teacher from Mr Pyne's electorate.
"The selection of the specialist curriculum reviewers has damaged any credibility or value that the review might have had," Ms Haythorpe said.
"Donnelly and Wiltshire have been allowed unfettered control and have picked a biased panel with clear links to right-wing think tanks, an imbalance towards private schools, and a lack of any relevant expertise in curriculum design."
A spokesman for Education Minister Christopher Pyne said the subject reviewers' credentials were "impeccable" and accused Labor and the Greens of political point scoring.
"The Review of the National Curriculum has been welcomed by almost everyone," the spokesman said. "It is not remotely an ideological document and that has been widely recognised. Questioning the bona fides of highly qualified individuals who weren't even appointed by the government is offensive."
Education department officials told Senate estimates hearings on Wednesday that all the papers written by the subject reviewers had been made public and were among many contributions to the final curriculum review.
Australian Association for the Teaching of English (AATE) president Garry Collins said the views of the specialist English reviewers should be given little weight when governments consider changes to the national curriculum.
"As far as AATE can see, there is no evidence to indicate that the views of Professor Spurr and Dr Fiona Mueller can be regarded as generally representative of the views of the many others in the country who have a similar degree of expertise," he said.
Professor Spurr, who has taken website New Matilda to court for publishing the emails, has said they were part of a "whimsical linguistic game".
In a leaked email Professor Spurr said Mr Pyne had asked him to compare the Australian curriculum with the Californian curriculum. Department officials said today that Mr Pyne did not have any contact with Professor Spurr during the review process.
