The curriculum is the problem…
… hmmm, something tells me that I should spend more time that I’m about to on considering the free curriculum discussion from Wales>Reynolds>Downes>Reynolds>Downes.
(reminds me of something Greg Ritter used to do… come back Greg… please!)
Here’s my take… in 95% of cases curriculum is artificial, unhelpful and obstructive. Learning has in many contexts become what it is not about, content.
I believe that all education proceeds by the participation of the individual in the social consciousness of the race… I believe that the only true education comes through the stimulation of the child’s powers by the demands of the social situations in which he finds himself. (John Dewey 1897)
…only through communication can human life hold meaning. The teacher’s thinking is authenticated only by the authenticity of the students’ thinking. The teacher cannot think for her students, nor can she impose her thought on them. Authentic thinking, thinking that is concerned about reality, does not take place in ivory tower isolation, but only in communication. (Paulo Freire 1970)
Yes, information and ‘knowledge’ is becoming more freely and widely available through projects such as the ones mentioned by Rob, yes there is a positive need and demand for materials / curriculum / call-it-what-you-will and, in a practicable sense, you can’t do without the stuff in todays classroom.
But fer crissakes let’s not get bogged down in it… let’s not replicate the embedded and deeply flawed transmissive models we’ve been endowed with (and which, if anything, have picked up steam through this digital ‘revolution’ we’re experiencing) and please please please don’t go developing kinder curriculum or aiming for ‘a complete curriculum… by 2040′… like there’s *one* set of stuff that’s all we need.
Wales is right, he is making this prediction “completely by the “seat of [his] pants.”"… but unfortunately he’s also talking out of them…
August 11th, 2005 at 2:15 am
Well said, James. I think one of the biggest mistakes that teachers make, especially in secondary and post-secondary schooling, is to view our job as being transmitters of standardized curricula. Curriculum ought to serve the goal of authentic thinking. Elementary teachers and elementary curricula, in my experience, do the best job of engaging their students in authentic thinking. So what fails in secondary/post-secondary situations?
August 11th, 2005 at 9:29 am
If you consider from the point of view of a well intentioned but novice instructor the mistakes that Rob identifies might well be understood as necessary first steps as the instructor confronts the fear of teaching. Elementary school teachers have been student teachers earlier. Being a TA as a grad studentt is some preparation for being an instructor as a faculty member, but its not the same because the institution is likely different, the power relationships are different, and perhaps the subject matter is different as well.
So perhaps instead of talking about free content, which to me is orthogonal to this issue, we should talk about how instructors come to see the student view and what concrete steps might be take to speed up that process.