This
week’s topic is a tricky one as it lends itself to multiple interpretations of
what should be the required objectives that students learn in schools. Throughout American history, curriculum and
educational objectives have been selected with a variety of factors in mind,
including educational philosophies of the time period as well as social and
political happenings of the time. The problem
is that as ideologies change over time, the instructional objectives need to change
along with them and making those decisions thickens the plot.
Russell
Shorto’s article “How Christian Were the Founders?” discusses the recent social
studies curriculum debate in Texas and the science debate they have had in the
past. This article is the classic example
of how getting individuals to agree on what should be taught in schools seems
like an impossible task. Educators,
community members, and state school board members are discussing various topics
that they all have differing opinions on and coming to a consensus seems
impossible. Do you know who was not
mentioned in the article and who probably did not even attend these meetings?
Kids. Actual students who could probably sort through huge adult egos and petty
arguments with something that makes sense were probably not even there. In
Ralph Tyler’s article “Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction”, he
argues that we need to look at the learners themselves when developing good
curriculum as well as the subject specialists and educational philosophy of the
time.
I
feel like adults should spend less time sitting around worried about what we think students should be learning and
be more practical. I can tell you that
personally, as a social studies teacher, I have never used an algebraic
equation in my adult life. Yet, somewhere along the way, someone determined that was an important educational objective that
all 8th graders had to
learn. Now, I know that algebraic equations are needed for some adult
professions, but not mine. Do you know what would have been valuable for me to
learn? I wish I would have been taught how to convert measurements such as how
many teaspoons are in a cup. I can’t tell you how many times I have actually
needed something like that. I was not taught that, however, because it wasn’t
on my list of state mandated math standards.
Reading
about developing curriculum is frustrating.
Frustrating to me as an educator who is constantly asked to teach more
in less time, frustrated for my students who have to learn so many things they
care nothing about, and frustrated because I don’t have all the answers of how
to make it better. I totally agree with Tyler’s thoughts that when developing
curriculum you need an end goal in mind that is specific and measurable and
not a vague blanket statement like “to create well-rounded citizens”, but
getting individuals to agree on such a goal seems like an improbable mission.
Related Websites:
Very informative and helpful PDF guide to curriculum
development in the middle school setting.
An article on curriculum inquiry and how it can help districts and teachers to decide which decisions to make and which to leave to personal choice.
Hi Kristi,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your post!
You take away from Tyler a big-picture point--curriculum deliberation and design is about balancing the needs of the subject matter, society (via theory), and ACTUAL kids. In Tyler's view, kids are the first thing you consider when creating curriculum. To me, that is only common sense. You can state what kids should know all day, but what a child actually knows and can do is always the trump card when it comes to where teachers actually have to start.
Your view of children is refreshing. They are not mindless and hedonistic bodies that only want the easy and the obvious--they are smart people who can cut through the bologna and partake in a conversation about what is really valuable for their own learning. If we could make children and their families partners in our curriculum deliberations, we could build a set of local standards from the ground up. I see you moving in that direction.
(Thinking here, too, about your writing on manners from a previous post.)
Tyler is pretty clear that teaching is a practical and eclectic art. Curriculum needs to embrace that and give teachers room to maneuver. Theories which attempt to answer questions about curriculum once and for all are, in this sense, dangerous. It leads us into fads that are tossed away when the next great theory comes along.
I share your frustration with vacuous goals like "well rounded citizens." However, I sometimes think the problem with such statements is that we only pay lip service to them, and forget to hold up our curriculum to the bigger goal. Big goals can be a reminder that we need to keep thinking and talking about what we are doing, as teachers. Teachers talking to teachers is ultimately, I think, what Tyler has in mind for the development of curriculum. I think it's probably preferable to what we have now.
Thanks again for your post!
Kyle