The Hon. JACQUI MUNRO (10:43): I move:

(1)That this House affirms findings 6 and 7 of the Joint Select Committee on Arts and Music Education and Training in New South Wales which state that the draft stage 6 Drama and Music syllabuses do not meet community expectations and require extensive revision.

(2)That this House notes information gathered about the stage 6 Creative Arts syllabus drafting process under Standing Order 52, including that:

(a)two members of the technical advisory groups [TAGs] on music emailed direct feedback to the New South Wales Education Standards Authority [NESA] following a targeted assessment consultation meeting in late September 2024 with concerns about NESA's consultation process, stating:

(i)"Of greater concern to me … is the direction the whole syllabus has taken.";

(ii)"I feel there is still hope for a change in direction before this goes out for a complete slaughtering.";

(iii)"I am concerned … that the consultation process may not lead to meaningful changes, based on the feedback provided during the session, and the fairly firm position expressed by those involved in development the new syllabus and the related assessment plans. I sincerely hope that this perception is proven wrong."; and

(iv)"I also hope your team will take on board the feedback from music education experts in the spirit in which it has been offered, ensuring the final syllabuses and assessments reflect best practice in music education rather than being driven by a purely statistical rationale.".

(b)a further member reached out to NESA the week before to say:

(i)"My recollection of my own feedback on the issues being discussed was at odds with the summary presented, which had no detail and simply confirmed that the consultation had occurred, and by inference, agreed with the issues being discussed.";

(ii)"I wonder if being on the TAG has any meaning if the consultation is not going to be referred to when an opportunity arises? It comes across as an exercise in rubberstamping decisions that have already been made."; and

(iii)"raises serious questions in my mind regarding future feedback".

(c)there was apparent consensus amongst TAG music representatives on 29 August 2024 that repertoire requirements in Music 1 and Music 2 were "a dangerous idea", but they were included in the draft syllabus regardless;

(d)issues raised through the Curriculum and Credentials Committee music syllabus meeting on 20 May 2024 included the very same list of concerns that were raised in subsequent TAG meetings in 2024 and through the Have Your Say period, without the syllabus being changed, including concerns about the compressed timeline which were recorded in minutes as stating:

(i)"… the expedited timeline is concerning given the complexity involved in differentiating and aligning the multiple Stage 6 Music syllabuses"; and

(ii)"The department anticipates that this pressure will increase as complex issues and risks are likely to emerge during the public consultation phase of the syllabus developed from this concept paper.".

(e)minutes of TAG meetings and feedback on drafts reflect ongoing concern about the removal of externally marked group performances and the risk of mandating solo performances, including feedback that mandating a scripted solo performance to an audience "could lead to a large drop in enrolments – considering many students who would not do drama now if they were made to perform individually".

(3)That this House further notes that:

(a)submissions to the Joint Select Committee on Arts and Music Education and Training in New South Wales regarding the NESA stage 6 music and drama syllabuses Have Your Say consultation in 2024 overwhelmingly expressed that NESA's proposed changes fall well short of best practice and teacher expectations, from consultation to content to assessment;

(b)the Government is not supporting recommendation 18 of the Joint Select Committee on Arts and Music Education and Training in New South Wales, which states, "That during curriculum reviews and reforms, the NSW Education Standards Authority publish all public submissions and provide detailed reasoning when releasing second drafts for consultation."; and

(c)the Chief Executive Officer of NESA, Mr Paul Martin, indicated during budget estimates in February 2025 that there would not be further public consultation on the draft stage 6 music and drama syllabuses.

(4)That this House asserts that the Government and NESA's proposed stage 6 music and drama syllabuses changes are for statisticians, not students.

(5)That this House calls on the Minns Labor Government and Minister for Education and Early Learning, the Hon. Prue Car, MP, to instruct NESA to conduct a second public consultation on the stage 6 music and drama syllabuses, including a month‑long Have Your Say period.

The changes proposed to the HSC music and drama syllabuses by the NSW Education Standards Authority are for statisticians, not students. The education Minister is watching on as the future of our creative artists is lost in Excel spreadsheets. This Government and the education Minister have a responsibility to intervene in the process, which has resulted in a parliamentary petition signed by 8½ thousand people across the State led by Dr Thomas Fienberg, a music teacher, syllabus assessor and academic; a music education expert speaking out to protest the bastardisation of their own work to justify these syllabus changes; and Tim Minchin feeling compelled to make a video, shared with his 350,000 Instagram followers, calling on the Minister to act. It has resulted in unprecedented unity amongst the drama and music community, led by teachers organising against the proposed changes. It is ongoing.

The proposed syllabus changes are a show stopper in all the wrong ways for students across New South Wales who want to develop their creative craft as performers, composers, thespians, producers and set designers. They restrict choice, limit creative expression and are contrary to decades of pedagogical research. How fortunate we are to have young people who want to pursue lives of creative expression despite the challenges, the insecurity and the competition, and who are so passionate about sharing the gifts of music, stories and art that they want to study their craft and work towards their dreams.

This Labor Government, and particularly the Minister for the Arts, and Minister for Music and the Night‑time Economy, have hung their hats on the idea of being pro creative industries, but the failure to acknowledge the serious and long-lasting impact of this change to high school music and drama education in New South Wales is shocking. Without going back to the drawing board on the syllabuses, the pipeline of our up‑and-coming creative talent will be squeezed into a bureaucratic box that prioritises easy numbers over necessary nuance. The draft syllabuses are a travesty. In his submission to NESA's "Have your say" process, a professor of music education who works at the Sydney Conservatorium of Music, James Humberstone, wrote:

… these drafts are so weak that it would be better to start afresh with proper research and consultation into what happens in tertiary education and in the music industry, because these documents are a far cry from preparing students for entry into institutions like mine, and for the musical activities that young creative musicians undertake.

Another academic, Professor Michael Anderson, was engaged by NESA to consult on the curriculum through the technical advisory group. Upon seeing the draft drama syllabus, he quit his role so he could freely and publicly condemn the syllabus content. His resignation letter stated, "This is profoundly disappointing and undermines my faith in NESA's process." Drama NSW has written to the education Minister, calling on her to instruct NESA to write a new draft syllabus that maintains the rigour and quality of the existing syllabus, aligns with international evidence-based practices and reflects the voices of teachers, students and researchers, particularly recognising the value of practical and collaborative outputs over an overemphasis on written work.

These concerns have to be spelt out because of the deep dissatisfaction that the current draft does not achieve these aims. Music 1 would mandate subjects; before, it had given students choice. Music subjects would see a doubling in written exam time and a halving of performance opportunities, and drama would mandate individual solo performances, which would, according to Drama NSW, see students drop out or not even choose this course because they are there for set design, production or directing. They are not there necessarily to stand up in front of an audience. Fundamentally, students would have fewer practical assessments, more written exams and be restricted in their choice of elective streams like composition and performance, repertoire and content.

NESA must undertake a second public consultation period and the Minister should instruct it to do so immediately. That would go some way to restoring public faith that this Government is serious about delivering world-class education for creative arts students. It would give all interested stakeholders the opportunity to develop, in partnership with NESA and the Government, syllabuses that will retain the world-class education system that we already have, not tear it down. The Government and NESA have so far rejected these calls. It was a deeply alarming revelation that the Government's response to the arts and music education inquiry suggested that it was more important to maintain the NSW Curriculum Reform timeline than to undertake the necessary consultation to improve these syllabuses for the students of New South Wales.

The Hon. COURTNEY HOUSSOS (Minister for Finance, Minister for Domestic Manufacturing and Government Procurement, and Minister for Natural Resources) (10:48): I lead for the Government in debate on this motion, although I anticipate that the Minister for the Arts and all creative fun stuff will probably make a contribution as well. I move:

That the question be amended in paragraph (5) by:

(1)Omitting "second public" and inserting instead "further".

(2)Omitting ", including a month‑long Have Your Say period".

I indicate that if the House supports these reasonable amendments, the Government will not oppose the motion. I welcome the enthusiasm of the Hon. Jacqui Munro. I would perhaps encourage her to be slightly more constructive in her approach regarding feedback. This House has long been interested in the improvement of our schools across New South Wales. I take the opportunity to commend the Deputy Premier for the large reform program that I speak about in this place and that many Government members speak about publicly. The Deputy Premier inherited a system that was a basket case. Whether it is addressing teacher vacancies, building much‑needed schools or improving the curriculum through a broad program of required reform, the Deputy Premier, and Minister for Education and Early Learning, is leading the Government's work.

The Government moves this amendment, with words of caution for the member, because this Parliament should absolutely have its say in setting that framework for curriculum reform. Indeed, this House has previously made recommendations such as explicit teaching, which is now being implemented by the Government. But once we start delving into specifics in relation to syllabuses, I caution the member to tread carefully. The NSW Education Standards Authority—NESA—is the body that has been charged by successive governments to engage with teachers and consult with experts and draft the syllabus. Indeed, the broad range of curriculum—I think 111 new syllabuses have been delivered to New South Wales teachers—reflect a strong evidence base. We do not oppose feedback, and we do not oppose more consultation. However, we oppose being overly prescriptive about the writing and content of syllabuses, and of the consultation process that should be undertaken. We have an important program of reform to rebuild the education system in this State, and we are proud of that process.

Ms ABIGAIL BOYD (10:51): On behalf of The Greens, I speak in support of the motion. The Greens back teachers as the experts and stakeholders when it comes to designing curriculum. The draft changes to the HSC music, drama, and dance syllabi put forward by the NSW Education Standards Authority [NESA] appeared to be all about cutting costs and very little to do with student outcomes. The 2024 inquiry of the Joint Select Committee on Arts and Music Education and Training in New South Wales clearly presented an overwhelming argument for greater focus on group and practical performance opportunities for students enrolled in performing arts courses. Finding 6 and finding 7 of the committee's report found that the draft Stage 6 Drama and Stage 6 Music 1 and Music 2 and Extension Music syllabuses do not meet community expectations and need extensive revision. I was pleased that the inquiry, which I was a part of, made the following recommendation:

That the NSW Government and the NSW Education Standards Authority ensures the Stage 6 Drama and Music syllabuses are reflective of community expectations and incorporates the feedback provided by community members of the Technical Advisory Groups, Targeted Assessment Consultations and the wider public through the Have Your Say period.

This recommendation was supported by the Government in its response to the inquiry report. I am informed by the Government that, in light of the strength of feeling about this issue, further consultation will be undertaken based on the feedback received in the Have Your Say survey, which ended on 20 December last year. Teachers are experts in teaching and deserve to have their professionalism and expertise reflected. A genuine co‑design of the syllabus is best not only for teachers but also for student outcomes and wellbeing.

This Government—and the previous Government did this as well—often talks about consultation as, "We showed it to some people, they said some things and we are now presenting the final version". That does not mean that the final outcome reflects what was contributed during that consultation, and we can end up with consultation being a tick-a-box exercise, not a genuine "listen and co‑design" process. Co-design is talked about a lot when we talk about what genuine consultation should look like. It is worth reflecting particularly on the terms of this motion—that people felt that they were not listened to in that process. It is not enough to just consult. We have to listen, and the changes from the draft to the final outcome should reflect that. With those words, we support the motion.

The Hon. AILEEN MacDONALD (10:54): Music and drama are not just subjects; they are tools for life. They teach confidence, communication, creativity and empathy. They help young people understand the world around them and express the world within. I have seen it firsthand, as my own children studied drama. They did not pursue it professionally, but what they gained has stayed with them. The ability to read a room, to think critically and to express themselves clearly are life skills. Even Shakespeare, hundreds of years on, still teaches us about power, love, jealousy and justice—things as relevant today as they were then. Drama brings that to life in a way no textbook can. And music? Music is connection, collaboration, discipline and expression. That is why the proposed changes to the Stage 6 music and drama syllabuses have struck such a nerve in the community. Removing composition, limiting elective choices, downgrading ensemble performance and doubling written exams are changes that move us away from creative learning and towards a rigid, one‑size‑fits‑all model.

Educators, students, academics and some of our country's most respected artists have said, loud and clear, that this is not the way forward. As they stand, the syllabuses do not reflect best practice. They do not meet community expectations. Let us be honest: These are changes designed for statisticians, not students. I commend the Hon. Jacqui Munro for bringing this motion forward and standing up for the creative future of students in New South Wales. The Government must recall the drafts, reopen the consultation and get this right, because we cannot afford to lose what makes our education system a leader in the arts, and we cannot afford to lose what makes our students better thinkers, communicators and citizens.

The Hon. SARAH MITCHELL (10:57): I speak in support of the motion moved by my colleague the Hon. Jacqui Munro and thank her for her work in this space. As the shadow Minister for Education and Early Learning, I have been happy to work alongside her and meet with a number of teachers and professional groups who have real concerns about the direction that these syllabus documents are heading. It is very telling when a call for papers finds specific examples from teachers and people who were members, or who remain members, of technical advisory groups. These expert teachers, many of whom have been HSC examiners for years and know their subject and core content inside out, are saying that there are problems. The necessary issues are not being addressed, and concerns remain about where this is up to.

As a former education Minister, I worked closely with the NSW Education Standards Authority. Some very good people work at NESA, and this is not in any way a reflection on it as an organisation. However, clearly, the teaching profession has significant concerns about what is and is not in these syllabuses. That is the point. There has been consultation already, but we are still getting emails and we are still having correspondence with some of the peak groups and teaching bodies like Drama NSW, whom I am catching up with soon, saying it is still not quite right. They have concerns about what is going on and the communications, and we are concerned that there will not be any more public consultation.

It is all very well and good for the Government to say, "Of course we will keep talking to teachers about this," but that needs to be public and transparent. That is the whole point. It is basically a once‑in‑a‑lifetime review of the curriculum, across a range of subject areas—in fact, all subjects areas—which was started under our Government and is continuing under this Government. It is a chance to get it right. During my time as Minister, many syllabus documents were worked on and some began to be rolled out, particularly for kindergarten, year 1 and year 2 in English and maths. If the Government was getting the kind of pushback that it is getting from a profession in any other area, it would take a step back and say, "We need to take this back to the drawing board and get it right."

As I said, these people are passionate. They have worked in this space for years and they know their subject areas. That is not to mention all the performing artists who have come forward and said, "If you do not get this right, it could potentially stymie future actors, singers, musicians and dancers in our community." It is particularly critical for stage 6. I completely support this motion, as I said. I congratulate the member on the hard work that she is putting into this area, which she is passionate about. It is appreciated. The Government can go back to the drawing board, work with what it has and take its time to get it right. It can take the profession along so that everyone can be excited about the new syllabus documents, rather than being concerned and upset about them. Teachers themselves are saying that it is not good enough.

The PRESIDENT: Order! According to sessional order, business is now interrupted for questions.