Cycle One: What is Curriculum? What is it's purpose?

What is curriculum? It is more than just what is taught. William Schubert in his article on curriculum ideologies attempts a definition, “Curriculum, at its root, deals with the central question of what is worth knowing; therefore, it deals with what is worth experiencing, doing, and being.” (169) It deals with such important, but broad ideas such as justice, what makes life good, and how humans interact with one another. This definition may seem idealistic, especially if one is thinking that curriculum simply means choosing whether to have students read through Socrates or EB White. When I chose to read to my two year olds “It’s Okay to be Different” by Todd Parr at circle time I am not just focused on language development, but am introducing my young students to imagination, diversity and tolerance.

The purpose of curriculum is as varied as the subject itself. Schubert introduced us to 4 theorists in the field. The intellectual-traditionalist would say that we need to teach students the classics in such a way that we take full advantage of the great ideas that accompany them. “Education should not be primarily vocational. However, the kind of curriculum I advocate teaches students to be interested in the great questions that penetrate all aspects of understanding the world. A great works curriculum enables students to think more carefully and to appreciate more deeply” (Schubert, 171). The social-behaviorist would argue that the we need to re-examine curriculum in every generation so we know what successful people are doing and teach that to our students. The experimentalist speaker would take a different approach that  “Learning springs from our genuine interests and concerns.” (Schubert, 173) and that through this methodology one learns important skills about learning and pursuing one’s passions. Finally, the critical reconstructionist would say that “students should learn to become activists who strive to overcome injustices that they face,” (Schubert, 174) and that that would result in consequential and valuable education.

As a pre-teacher, I was educated in the social-behaviorist camp. Teachers are expected to produce favorable outcomes- students who go on to college or are successful in finding employment. It forces a teacher to be continuously learning and continuously evolving to find the best practices.

In lesson planning, I have always had a little of the experimentalist in mind. It is very true, especially in middle and high school, that students arrive in the class with a lot of baggage. The fight with the parents the night before about cell phone charges, a fight at a shared locker, a bad grade in another class, are not just forgotten as the student enters your class. However, that does not have to be the focus of the class itself. I have found that anticipatory sets and warm-ups help to engage students and draw them in to what is being taught. 

Regardless of what is taught, what isn’t taught sometimes speaks louder. Eisner suggests, in his chapter “The Three Curricula That All Schools Teach” that through positive reinforcement and moirés schools are teaching children the importance of competition, compliant behavior, and a neglect of imagination. The reason behind this movement is that it is believed that most jobs require workers to be extrinsically motivated, those jobs do not allow the worker to find his/her own purpose, and depend on routine. While this is true for traditional cubical or factory line jobs, what about those of upper management who need to find creative cost cutting techniques, or business owners/creators who developed these organizations to begin with?

Schools have gotten better with the null curriculum since the writing of  Eisner’s article. One local high school offers classes similar to those mentioned in the article, and many more, including: Webpage design, policy debate, tv studio, technical writing, sports literature, exploring music, stress management, economics, and technology education. A student could learn about almost every interest and career possibility within the classroom environment. 

I found nothing more thought provoking in this week’s readings as the story of Donovan and through his story questioning the purpose of curriculum. Donovan is a 21 year-old, who due to a traumatic brain injury, is cognitively aged at 6-months, and has been labeled severely disabled. He is legally blind, cannot speak, and is confined to a wheel chair. Though his 15 years of formal schooling has changed Donovan socially, being less reserved, he has shown no significant educational progress. If his mother had her way, Donovan would be focusing on more self-help skills.  “Instead of having him work on basic academic goals, like identifying shapes and coins, she wishes he had physical therapy more than 30 minutes, twice a week, because it is generally the only time during the day he is taken out of his wheelchair, except when an aide takes him to the bathroom to change him.”

The principle, on the other hand, wants these high school aged special education students to have an experience similar to their general education peers, changing classes every 50-minutes and going to adapted versions of English, math, social studies, and science. “For example, Donovan will never be able to prepare breakfast, but he should be allowed to help stir a pot in cooking class, even if an aide must move his hand. He might not be able to call 911, but if he learns about firefighters in social studies, he might be able to recognize a siren when he hears one.”

So, who’s right? It is clear that we should choose the most suitable instructive supports and interventions for each child depending on their disabilities. A great majority of the people who commented on this particular article agreed that more time should be spent on Donovan’s occupational therapy than academic goals. It is intensely optimistic to believe that Donovan would be able to function on his own and would need the skills to be able to count change, or need to know the difference between a seed and a fruit. Music, on the other hand, stimulates brain activity and memorization. (http://www.cerebromente.org.br/n15/mente/musica.html) Is it really a surprise, then, that Donovan responded so favorably to “Old Mac Donald”?

The story of Donovan made me think of the special education students I taught in Maryland. In Calvert County, all high school students are required to take a county written mid-term and final exam. The exam for the special education students was shorter than the test given to traditional education students, but was none-the-less challenging. I was told by some of my colleagues that the special education students had no prayer of passing these tests. I had to make the decision whether to challenge my students to achieve something that may have been beyond their grasp, or teaching them to only accept from themselves mediocrity. The first option opened them up for failure, but the second would teach through implicit curriculum that they could not achieve what their peer’s were able to. I chose option A: pushing them through a lot of curriculum, and pushing them beyond their own beliefs in themselves. In the end, a majority of those students did poorly on that test. So, I am left to question: did I fail them in wanting them to show that they could do well on this test, or did an educational system with unreasonable expectations fail them? 

Readings for Cycle One:

E. Eisner. “The Three Curricula That All Schools Teach”

S. Otterman “A Struggle to Educate the Severely Disabled.”

W. Schubert. “Curriculum Ideologies”