David Lillis: Shakespeare in our Curriculum

The New Curriculum

The ongoing work on education under Erica Stanford has come in for a great deal of criticism over the last few months especially. The new curriculum has received particular censure, and the compulsory inclusion of Shakespeare in the English curriculum seems to have presented issues for some parties (Lillis, 2025). Indeed, New Zealand needs a balanced curriculum that reflects the multicultural nature of our society and therefore of our primary and secondary students, and surely a Eurocentric curriculum for New Zealand would be ill-posed and therefore completely unacceptable.

Here we examine some of the critical aspects of the current curriculum documents for English, as they apply to the diverse communities across New Zealand schools.

English Learning Area Years 0 – 10

In the Ministry of Education curriculum document of 20 October 2025, we see no mention of Shakespeare at all, though a case could be made for inclusion in Years 9 and 10 of one or two of his shorter works, such as certain sonnets. It does state that in Phase 1 (Years 0 – 3) knowledge and practice statements have been added in the decoding sub-element for Years 2 – 3 to support accurate pronunciation of kupu Māori in year level texts and highlight differences in sound representation between te reo Māori and English. In Phase 2 (Years 4 – 6) content that addresses correct decoding and pronunciation of kupu Māori is included in the decoding practice statement and the fluency practice statements and teaching considerations. In Phase 3 (Years 7 – 8) and in Phase 4 (Years 9 – 10) authors who are representative of New Zealand’s bicultural and multicultural heritage are now included explicitly.

English Year 11

In the English Year 11 Draft for Consultation (15 May to June 2026), again we see no mention of Shakespeare, which many consider regrettable. It does state that through study of literary traditions and the bicultural and multicultural literary heritage of Aotearoa New Zealand, alongside texts from global contexts, they [students] develop increasing authority as readers, writers, and thinkers, using English to interrogate ideas, traditions, and perspectives, and to participate thoughtfully in academic, cultural, and public conversations. It says that students must experience texts by a range of authors who are representative of Aotearoa New Zealand’s rich bicultural (both Māori and Pākehā) and multicultural literary heritage.

We read that Aotearoa New Zealand literature draws on forms, language and concerns from a range of local and global traditions (e.g. Māori, Pacific, Western). Some authors blend these to create distinctive literary voices. Further - Māori authors draw on Māori worldviews and narrative traditions - such as tikanga Māori, oral storytelling, and enduring connections to whenua - to centre Māori perspectives and lived experiences that shape and extend literary thought within Aotearoa New Zealand and beyond.

Further, Māori oral traditions (e.g. mihi, pepeha, pātere, mōteatea, whaikōrero) are rich and dynamic and impact the way in which oral presentations are structured, presented, and received by establishing conventions unique to Aotearoa New Zealand. We are told that oral traditions are an important means through which cultures sustain histories, values, and shared understandings; for example, through storytelling, speeches, songs, and ceremony.

English Years 12 - 13

The Draft for Consultation (15 May to June 2026) states that students undertake close reading and analysis of written literature, including literary movements and traditions.

We are told that this reading and analysis occur through a carefully sequenced body of texts that encompasses Aotearoa New Zealand literature alongside seminal and historic works that exemplify the development of literary tradition across periods, including Shakespearean drama.

In Year 13, students must engage meaningfully with an extended written text (either novel, memoir, or drama), a Shakespearean drama, a selection of poetry, a selection of short texts (e.g. fiction, creative non-fiction, personal essay). These options must include texts by a range of authors who are representative of New Zealand’s rich bicultural (both Māori and Pākehā) and multicultural literary heritage, including at least one text by a Māori author that has shaped significantly Aotearoa New Zealand’s literary and cultural heritage (e.g. Witi Ihimaera, Patricia Grace, Keri Hulme), at least one additional text by an author drawn from the diverse cultural communities of Aotearoa, that has significantly shaped Aotearoa New Zealand’s literary heritage (e.g. Katherine Mansfield, Albert Wendt, Chris Tse).

The document states that the unique geographical, social, historical, and cultural context of Aotearoa New Zealand is reflected in specific literary movements (e.g. cultural nationalism of the 1930s and 40s, the Māori Renaissance of the 1970s) which shape the themes, settings, perspectives, and concerns of texts.

We read that Aotearoa New Zealand literature draws on oral and written forms, language, and concerns from a range of traditions (e.g. Māori, Pacific, Western). Some authors blend these to create distinctive literary voices. Further, we read that New Zealand’s literary voice is distinctive in the way it increasingly incorporates te reo Māori, Māori literary forms, and te ao Māori worldviews. Māori authors use literature as both an expression of Māori worldviews and a literary contribution, drawing on these perspectives to enrich Aotearoa New Zealand literature and shape how national stories, identities, and values are understood locally and globally. It says that in Aotearoa New Zealand, poets may draw on forms that come from a range of literary traditions. These forms include a range of Māori forms (e.g. tauparapara, mōteatea, haka).

Students must also engage meaningfully with academic literature relating to at least one critical lens or theory (e.g. Post-colonialist theory, Formalist theory, Feminist theory, Postmodernist theory, Structuralist theory, or a te ao Māori worldview). Sources may include journal articles, literary criticism, or kaupapa Māori scholarship.

Students are expected to evaluate and appraise features of text across a range of forms, including poetry, prose, and Shakespearean drama, with precision. We read that authorship in Aotearoa New Zealand literature is shaped by Pacific contexts, where relationships between writers, texts, cultures, and communities influence how literary voice, authority, and identity are constructed and understood.

A Balanced Curriculum?

It seems to me that we have an English curriculum that includes Māori worldviews and voices very prominently. However, my concerns are twofold. First, our Pacific People and other ethnic and cultural groups deserve greater presence and, as so often, they appear almost as an afterthought. Second, given the immense stature of William Shakespeare as an author, playwright and poet and also as a humanitarian, surely room could be created for more than one work of his during the entirety of the high school years.

Here in New Zealand Dr. Peter Winsley (2016) wrote that Shakespeare believed in individual uniqueness, in human rights and dignity, and in the universality of human consciousness. His works cannot be captured by any cultural, religious, political, ethnic or other identity group that divides people. Dr. Winsley regards Shakespeare as the supreme poet and dramatist of humanism; humanism as a belief system and as a guide to how to live. He says that Shakespeare judged people as individuals, but not on their race, ethnicity, wealth, status, family affiliation or gender. He understood that individuality is almost infinitely variable, even within the same family.

Shakespeare was popular in pre-Soviet Russia and subsequently in the Soviet Union, China and Japan. Germany, often militarily at odds with England, took him to heart, considered him in a sense their writer. In addition, many Hungarians have spent more time on Shakespeare than on any Hungarian writer in their high school years (Professor Brian Boyd, Pers comm). Sokolova and Valls-Russell (2022) tell of the popularity of Shakespeare in Germany, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Romania and other nations and surely there are good reasons as to why Shakespeare’s works have been translated into over one hundred languages (Estill and Johnson, 2015).

Te Mātaiaho: The New Zealand Curriculum

The current version of New Zealand’s overarching curriculum document - Te Mātaiaho: The New Zealand Curriculum (Ministry of Education, 2026) - seems to present a balanced curriculum that meets the needs of students and schools. Very clearly, it states that as set out in section 127(2)(e) of the Act, schools must take all reasonable steps to provide for students to be taught, and to learn, in te reo Māori on request of their parents or immediate caregivers. It says that students are taught a curriculum that covers a common set of knowledge, practices, and capabilities, and reflects the Crown’s obligations under te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi, as set out in section 32 of the Education and Training Act 2020 – supporting every student to achieve their highest educational potential.

Some teaching of te reo Māori is integrated into the required learning areas (e.g. the teaching of specific kupu and concepts that are unique to te ao Māori). Schools are encouraged to provide further opportunities for their students to learn and use te reo Māori. This is supported by a teaching sequence for te reo Māori within the Learning Languages learning area and by the Years 11 – 13 Te Reo Māori subject. Schools may also choose to offer bilingual or immersion education through te reo Māori using Te Mātaiaho and Te Anga. Students who complete the Year 13 Te Reo Māori subject in The New Zealand Curriculum early can be supported to go on to study the Years 11 – 13 Te Reo Rangatira subject.

Positive Discussions on Education in New Zealand

We see considerable diversity of feedback on the current re-development of education, and we see a great deal of criticism. Such criticism, if offered constructively, is a necessary and healthy contribution to the mix of ideas that will shape a better future for education than we have experienced over the last twenty years. However, are all of the current criticisms of the curriculum fair and have they been articulated respectfully?

Only a few weeks from a national election, it is time to review the ongoing discourse on education, an area that is so vitally important to our young people and for the future of our country. What is so inspiring right now is the very constructive nature of some, though not all, of the ongoing discussions.

An article from Alwyn Poole exemplifies what is needed in our debates (Poole, 2026). Mr. Poole made a valuable contribution to the discussion on education in New Zealand and maintained a balanced, politically neutral tone throughout.

Contributions such as Mr. Poole’s article are essential as we head towards a national election because they circumvent party politics and the negativity that has emerged within the discourse on education in other countries over the last few years. Indeed, Mr. Poole provided a fine example of how the debate on education should be conducted – with balance and objectivity and with clear intent to add value to the mix of ideas.

Offering our Opinions with Respect

It is very reassuring that those who are working currently on the education reforms are doing so with great energy and are creating a new direction for education that hopefully will lead to significant improvements in teaching and learning. Of course, it is critical that they listen to all constructive criticism that is offered in good faith and that they take all necessary actions that emerge from those well-intended suggestions. 

Here it is very important to recognize not only the excellent work of Erica Stanford and her team, but also the integrity, patience and goodwill that they have brought to the ongoing debate. It is also critically important to acknowledge the very positive contributions of others who oppose the current reforms from philosophical and professional perspectives, but who nevertheless have voiced their opinions with good intent. Among this community we recognize those who have argued for a central position of knowledge systems and ‘other ways of knowing’ within education in New Zealand, a position with which I agree in part, and who also argue for equality of status of traditional knowledge with modern global science, a view with which I can agree only as and when knowledge claims made within those systems have been tested through the methods of science.

Among the leading proponents of an education system in which traditional knowledge has a prominent place are certain young people, some of them students at New Zealand universities. Highly intelligent, fearless, articulate and deeply knowledgeable about education despite their youthful age, some of them are already making valuable contributions to policy, and on social media post regularly on issues relating to education and on other matters of public interest.

They, and sometimes hundreds of followers, advance their carefully considered and deeply informed perspectives with humor and satire, and all of it very good-natured. They comment on the critical issues in most positive fashion, always constructive and kind in their delivery and most generous when commenting publicly on other people.

Never do we see even the remotest hint of the invective, bad language and ad hominem attacks that are so corrosive to goodwill across communities and that we observe in other jurisdictions in other countries. Those of us who have worked in education for many years have much to learn from these young people and we should listen very carefully when they inform us of the best configuration of our national curriculum!

When these young people complete their tertiary qualifications and move into education as professionals and possibly even to Parliament as leaders of our country, the future of education in New Zealand could not be in better hands!

Dr David Lillis trained in physics and mathematics at Victoria University and Curtin University in Perth, working as a teacher, researcher, statistician and lecturer for most of his career. He has published many articles and scientific papers, as well as a book on graphing and statistics.

References

Estill, L. and Johnson, E. (2015). Fun international facts about Shakespeare

https://www.britishcouncil.org/voices-magazine/fun-international-facts-about-shakespeare#:~:text=Other%20popular%20plays%20in%20translation,into%20more%20than%20100%20languages.

Lillis, David (2025). Shakespeare in the English Curriculum?
https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2025/04/david-lillis-shakespeare-in-english.html

Ministry of Education (2026). Te Mātaiaho: The New Zealand Curriculum
https://newzealandcurriculum.tahurangi.education.govt.nz/new-zealand-curriculum-online/the-new-zealand-curriculum-te-m-taiaho/5637303584.p

Poole, Alwyn (2026). I Know the Post is long but PISA is a Big Deal.
https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2026/09/alwyn-poole-i-know-post-is-long-but.html

Sokolova, Boika and Janice Valls-Russell, Janice – Editors (2022). Shakespeare’s Others in 21st-century European Performance: The Merchant of Venice and Othello BLOOMSBURY, THE ARDEN SHAKESPEARE.

Winsley, Peter (2016). Why Shakespeare is important for young people
https://winsleys.wordpress.com/2016/12/19/why-shakespeare-is-important-for-young-people/