Thursday, October 24, 2013

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 

Friday, October 4, 2013

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/49263362#53190759  This is a video from a former educational reformer who changed her position.  The positions stated in this video are consistent with our discussion.

Tuesday, September 10, 2013

Educational goals and structure by Fabaree

Fabaree constructs three goals of education, social mobility which is the concept that education as a method for self improvement within society, Social efficiency which understands education as a means for citizens to gain skills useful for society, Democratic equalization which entails education as a method to ensure that citizens should be treated as equals.  These three goals seem to reflect different stances on educational policies that are often used in dialogues about education.

The value of social efficiency was especially interesting as it matched a tendency I've seen in how education is being framed.  However, what it means for something to be educationally efficient seems to differ from the description that Fabaree used it.  Fabaree described an example of educational efficiency through the use of different strata of universities.  It argued that the perceived quality of different universities determine the economical worth of a degree.  How social efficiency seems to be currently used is through different fields of studies.  This is reflected in the desire to encourage math and science educations to give students skills to be competitive on a world stage.

Egalitarian goals seem to be attempted through school reform.  This entails utilizing competitive means to help improve schools that are failing.  This method seems to reflect the movement away from attempts to promote equality by funding schools with poorer populations more.  This looks at equality promotion as a quality that should be promoted by the school's quality.  This ignores systemic reasons for inequal accesses to education.        

Monday, September 2, 2013

This will be my documentation of any thoughts on the readings about the education and social change course.