Rethinking Schooling for the 21st Century

or lack of capacity for implementing curricular reform — or both (see Box 4.2).
And in a context of weak official control over textbook production and curricular
delivery (Maca and Morris, 2015), government proclamations often have a
largely symbolic quality. One possible example of such a symbolic gesture is the
Department of Education’s decision to include the history of martial law in the
curriculum in the wake of controversy over former dictator Ferdinand Marcos’
burial at the Heroes Cemetery in 2016 (Mateo, 2016); what effect this has on
teaching and learning remains to be seen.
‘Carrier’ subjects of values
As in much of the postcolonial world (and beyond), across Southeast Asia
subjects such as social studies, history and civics, typically the ‘carrier subjects’
for ESD/GCED, largely focus on national values, although they also highlight
other values (Baildon et al., 2014). The Indonesian Social Studies curriculum, for
example, focuses on attitudes and character-building with the aim of nurturing
students who are ‘wise, responsible, caring, polite and confident, and patriotic’
(p. 62); reference to more universalistic values such as human rights and gender
equality are scant. Consciousness of national identity is to be imparted through
having students learn about Indonesian national heroes. In Malaysia, the subject
curricula for History (Social Studies), Moral Education (Values Education) and
English feature an emphasis both on fostering desirable ‘attitudes’ (patriotism
prominent among them), and on improving cognitive ‘skills’ (including critical
and systemic thinking). But in a context of increasingly Islamicised and Malaycentric
notions of national identity as conveyed through curricula, the scope for
teachers or students to critically discuss state-determined visions of nationhood
appears to be narrowing (see Ting, 2015).
In the Philippines, the curricula for Social Studies and Values Education appear to
promote consciousness of the importance of interconnectedness; global issues;
human rights; transversal skills; and responsible lifestyles. Official guidelines for
both subjects positively emphasise the importance of one’s culture and identity;
the rights of Filipinos as members of the nation; and values such as democratic
participation, respect for diversity, and caring for others and the environment.
However, as already noted, promotion of other cross-cutting concepts such as
gender equality or the culture of peace and non-violence do not feature amongst
the list of qualities to be fostered through either subject. And, as discussed
above, the effectiveness with which the Filipino curriculum imparts a coherent
and unifying vision of national identity is questionable.
While frequently mentioned in Thailand’s national curriculum framework, the
concept of culture of peace and non-violence is poorly covered in subject
curricula, for example in social studies. The curriculum largely ignores issues of
conflict within the country, according little or no emphasis to concepts such as
interconnectedness, collaboration with others and respect for diversity. With
Rethinking Schooling for the 21 st Century:
The State of Education for Peace, Sustainable Development and Global Citizenship in Asia
125