Curriculum
Michael Mortensen
10/14/2013
The
history of the development of American curriculums maps two distinct
philosophies of education. The primary
trend entails the setting up curriculum to ensure that students receive
adequate education. In theory, the curriculum
is a tool for teacher’s to understand what is necessary for them to cover in a
class. By doing this, it fulfills the social efficiency role of education, as
it attempts to ensure that students obtain the necessary skills to enter the
workforce or higher education. However,
curriculums often create substantial controversies. Whether it’s seen as a burden on teachers or
it’s being used to convey an agenda, creating curriculums has been consistently
controversial. As we perceive economic
competition on a global level, there is an increasing desire to implement more
centralized education curriculum.
1.
Literature Review.
The History of
curriculum reform and theory.
The curriculum is tied to the role of education as a
mechanism to ensure that students have the skills that are necessary for
adulthood. An early author who tied the
curriculum to this function is John Bobbit.
He wrote that the curriculum should entail a “series of experiences
children and youth must have to” accomplish the goals that students need to
have to be functional adults. This
passage ties curriculum to the view of education that education should provide
the student with the skills necessary to function within society. The belief in the necessity of the curriculum
as a way to ensure social efficiency is based on the ability for a curriculum
to ensure students are provided the skills necessary to have for their ages.
The need for curriculum emerged when comparative
educational studies were engaged. An
Author named Joseph Rice conducted a study of curriculums throughout the
country. This study was based on his
studies of German schools. He researched
36 cities education system and saw a vast discrepancy between different
schools. He then used these results to
determine how to best construct a curriculum.
Rice used scientific methods to research school performance. His studies of curriculums brought out some
critiques and issues that future reformers experience. The tests that he used to measure school
performance resulted in some cheating by the test administrators. He was also criticized for lacking experience
in the classroom. The tendency to oppose
quantified education evaluation because of this is a recurring theme in
controversies over the development of curriculum.
Another substantial figure in the development His school’s curriculum reflected the
pragmatic ideology as it utilized the curriculum as a laboratory. Through this process Dewey used his school
system to indicate what teaching styles work.
Dewey’s theory of curriculum is focused on two factors. One was the world of the adult, the other was
the experiences of the child. These
factors encouraged education to focus on cultivating the child’s education by
utilizing the child’s experiences. This
attempts to utilize the authenticity concept towards the curriculum by
constructing a curriculum based on what resonates with the student rather than
just imposing onto the student what adult’s predetermine what is necessary. Dewey’s model argues to include child’s
interests and perceptions is necessary when developing a curriculum.
The debate on the curriculum has often also contained
conflicts between different interests involved in education policy. This conflict is on multiple levels. Imposing a curriculum on teachers removes
their control of the classrooms. This
debate is sees an implementation of a curriculum gives control to people who
lack direct experience in education.
Another conflict that results from curriculum being impose on a school
district is based on the support for local control of the school district. Efforts to create a common curriculum removes
local control of the school district.
This response is indicated from the opposition towards an implementation
of a common core curriculum.
The
Politics of Education
The
priorities that emerge when discussing education on a political realm. Attempting to implement education
reform. Changes to education is
dependent on the scale in which the policy is implemented. The relationship between the scales of the
policy implemented on an educated to the type of policy is illustrated by the Book Politics of Education. This book argued that policies made on
the local level are more responsive to the demands of the constituents and
policies made on a level more distant from the constituents are made
with the goal for the betterment of society.
On the state and federal level the policies are less responsive to the
goals of the constituents. In the realm
of curriculum formation, the levels of government have different
influence. Traditionally the local level
had the most substantial influence in curriculum formation, however the states
have expanded their influence in determining school curriculums. However, other interests have determined that
they should have influence in education policy.
The
state government currently has influence over designing the curriculum. The state determines what should be taught
and which grade level. This is then
evaluated through standardized testing to determine how the school is
performing. Centralization attempts to ensure that
students throughout the different localities have access to equal quality of
education through management of the curriculum.
The states feel they are able to implement policies that ensure that
schools abide by what the state considers to be the most effective means to
ensure that students are sufficiently taught.
A Nation at Risk.
A Nation at Risk was the conclusion of a study conducted
by the National Commission on Excellence in Education in 1983. This study was done to evaluate the
productivity of American education institutions, public and private and was
then used to determine problems with the education system. The results indicated problems with the
performance with the students and lagging scores in skills in math and
science. These discoveries have driven
policy creators on the national and state level to implement reforms to the
education system to increase the quality of education. This effected the implementation of
curriculums by driving more attention to math and science.
This evaluation of our education has undergone criticism
for having flawed methods of evaluations.
One organization that was critical of the findings of the Nation at risk
was the Cato instate. On the findings of
the Nation at Risk study, they claimed that other factors influenced the change
in productivity. They also pointed out
that immediately following the study there was a period of increased productivity. They argued that the findings have driven
school districts to implement strict curricula that removed teacher’s abilities
to focus on other courses. This
institution argued that the conclusions and the policies driven by the study
were flawed based both on the assumptions and suggestions that it made.
The study was also criticized by the article at the Phi
Delta Kappa. In this article it
similarly pointed out how the ties between education and economic success were
only measured in the negative. For
example they tied the low ranks in education to poor economic production. However, in the 1990s there wasn’t praise for
the education system for the nation’s strong economic performance.
Profit and the
Educational industrial complex.
The driving factor towards standardization also included
the lobbying from educational support for profit endeavors. The
book, The Great Educational Industrial
Complex, argues that the drive for standardized curriculums and expansion
for more tools for teachers was driven by the industry that profited on the changes
that education policy makers implement.
Private industries utilize education policy because schools are a
consistent market for their products. In the case of curriculum, the profitable
industries that have an influence over what is taught is seen in the text book
industry. Standardization in education
curriculum expands the market for textbooks so there is a profit incentive for
standardization of education.
The Common Core
Curriculum
The
Common Core Curriculum is an effort to implement a nearly standardized
curriculum by providing to schools a list of educational goals that students
should achieve. The desire for a common
core curriculum resulted from the concerns raised about the state of
education. The policy resulted from an
agreement between different states to adopt these standards with the belief
that the standards would improve the quality of education. The logic behind implementing a national
curriculum is to use practices that seem to be effective and implement them
across the country to increase the educational efficiency of the local school
districts. The policy advocates that
students should obtain a certain level of reading and math and English. This would be ensured by students taking a
national standardized test. The
resulting goal would be to see more students better prepared for colleges and
careers. Opposition to this policy resulted
from a belief that implementing an overarching curriculum would remove local
control of education. They argue that it
removes control from good teachers. That
the policy necessitates the teacher to focus on certain lessons, while being
unable to vary based on him or her own experiences of what works. This ties the critique of the common core
curriculum with a general critique of curriculums as being an instrument that
relinquishes control of education policies from local governments. They argue that by using an educational
curriculum that was constructed outside the state which constitutes a
relinquishing of control of education policy from the state to the federal
government. The positions on the common
core curriculum illustrates the conflict between ensuring effective and quality
education from schools and maintaining local and teacher impact on the
curriculum.
Theory and normative statement
about curriculums
One
of the major reasons for centralization of the curriculum creation process is the
transition towards a heavily skilled based economy and away from a
manufacturing based economy. It occurred
as a result of increased globalization and technology. These factors affected education policy by
necessitating more skills in order to receive a well-paying career. This transition affected two major factors in
the role of education, the social efficiency and societal mobilization role of
education. As competition and technology
influenced these factors because they require students to have certain
skills. In order to adapt to these
factors, Government representatives have advocated and implemented policies
that attempt to adapt to these economic conditions. The mechanisms that they have used to do so
included standardization of the curriculum and school accountability. The goal of these reforms is to see practices
conducive to better quality education encourage and monetary incentives used to
increase the quality of education.
A
second driving factor is the use of the themes of neoliberalism and empirical
data. The promoters of increased
standardized curriculums believe that education performance can be measured
through data and through this process possible reforms can be implemented to
improve the quality of education. The
assumption this makes is that improving the scores and quality of education can
be determined through the process of curriculum creation. While this is consistent with the theory
behind the curriculum as a mechanism to help determine what is necessary to
teach, it can also be a mechanism that controls the subjects that the teacher
is able to teach. For example, as social
efficiency value of education starts to dominate how policy makers shape
education policy, there are is a desire to emphasize subjects that are perceived
to more socially efficient than others.
This removes control from the teachers to determine what should be
taught. The Neoliberal political
philosophy also drives educational policy. Neoliberalism is a mindset that
drives social policy through engaging in monetary incentives. In this case, the policy maker attempts to
incentivize teachers to follow a standardized curriculum by testing the
students and using the results to determine how to allocate the money. This further restricts teachers’ flexibility
and forces them to stay on a set curriculum.
Curriculum
creation policy was initially a way to guide teacher’s lessons to ensure they
are covering what is necessary for their students to understand at the grade
level. Policy makers have always used curriculum
policies to encourage social efficiency functions. However, as neoliberal political philosophy
and empirical data drives education policy curriculum policy to implement the
goals that these systems desire for teachers.
Implementing more standardized curriculums restrict the teacher’s
flexibility and impose external demands on schools.
Sources:
1.
Kliebard, Herbert. The Struggle for the American Curriculum. New York: Routledge, 2004
2.
Dewey, Thomas. The Curriculum and the Child. Chicago:
Adamant, 2007
3. Cormier,
Jane. “Five Reasons to Oppose the Common
Core.” Concord Monitor
4. Common
Core Curriculum. “The State Standards Initiative.” Corestandards.org
5. Spring,
Joel. Politics of American Education. New York: Routledge: 2011
6. Piccano,
Anthony, Joel Spring. “The Great
American Educational Industrial Complex.”
7. Rothschild,
Richard. “A Nation at Risk, Twenty Five
Years Later.” CATO Institute. 2008
8. “A
Nation at Risk: the Imperative for Educational Reform.” The National Commission
in Education. 1980
9. “April
Foolishness: The 20th Anniversary of “A Nation at Risk.” Phi Delta
Kappa Vol 84 N 8. 2003
