When we talk about curriculum in a broad sense, we are referring to the specific knowledge and information needed to be passed on to students in order to meet the end goals of a specific class or course. Different forms or styles of curriculum incorporate different ways of teaching or sharing knowledge, and different ways of assessing if the knowledge was successfully understood or learned. When looking at how knowledge is passed down to students and how their understanding of this new knowledge is assessed, we tend to run into many problems. Students are individuals, meaning that they learn in their own unique individual way. If we are to teach in only one way, we are placing many students at a disadvantage and setting them up for failure.
In the article “Curriculum theory and practice” Smith talks about the Tyler rational of curriculum. Focusing on curriculum in this way often lacks individuality and leaves little to no room for creativity. Memorization of specific information or skill to then be regurgitated for an exam or assessment, is required to be successful. I remember taking notes, after notes, after notes, and reading them over, and over to attempt to remember them, so I could quickly answer questions on an exam. What did I actually learn when I was doing this and being taught in this way? I’m going to say next to nothing. I hated school, which is interesting since I love learning. This type of hands off learning, listen, read, memorize, did not fit my learning style by any stretch of the imagination, especially if it was something I didn’t find interesting. I remember in high school getting career counseling from my home room teacher. He was determined that I take biology as without it, I was completely losing my chances at getting a career in the medical field. What if I wanted to be a doctor or a nurse or even a surgeon? I needed to focus on all of the sciences and art seemed very unimportant in his mind. I knew for a fact that even if I was interested in the medical field, which I most certainly was not, the fact that I fainted at the site of blood kind of solidified in my mind this was not the proper career path for me to choose. According to traditional curriculum you NEED this knowledge to be successful in life.
To me it makes more sense to follow your interests and curiosities; as a teacher I want my students to understand not memorize, I want them to find something they love so they can be successful in life AND happy. Yes, there is a need for certain knowledge, but it needs to be passed on to students in a way that benefits them, not what the “system” thinks is best practice.
There is a place in curriculum to have specific requirements and knowledge to be passed on. There are things in life we do need to know to be successful productive beings. As a teacher it is nice to have a guide for what you should be teaching and what is appropriate for what stage of development. So in this way there are some good aspects of this type of curriculum. This being said we also need to focus on the fact that this knowledge changes as the world makes new discoveries and advances in all “subject” areas. In this sense the product that is linked to Tyler’s theory of curriculum should be forever changing in order to be current and relevant.
I find this way of teaching to be very close minded. Yes, the expectations for a teacher are clear and easily understood, but the chance for creativity and meeting children’s differing needs just isn’t there. In education the students and their well being is more important, than if they can name all of the states in the U.S. and their capitals.
Smith, M. K. (1996, 2000) ‘Curriculum theory and practice’ the encyclopaedia of informal education, www.infed.org/biblio/b-curric.htm.
Hi Amber,
I enjoyed reading your post! You made a lot of good points. I did want to touch on the one point you made about having to take a biology class. I do think students should follow their curiosity but I do agree that there should be criteria like there is now about having to take certain classes. This is since in ESCI we are learning about scientific literacy and how if people are scientifically literate they able to form evidence based opinions. This in turn creates better functioning society. I also know a lot of people who have gone back to take classes now because they thought they would not need them for what they were gonna do. I do think there is a need for creativity in the classroom though. So if art is someones passion I think they should be able to expression themselves in that way. I mentioned this in my blog post as well. Like you I knew in high school art was not something I was going to do for a living, since I would get so frustrated if I would make one mistake. I was also really good at comparing myself to others! I guess overall, I am am agreeing that there is a need for both and society cannot function without either one.