Levin’s article exhibits that the construction of the curriculum is largely influenced by politics. “Policies govern just about every aspect of education – what schooling is provided, how, to whom, in what form, by whom, with what resources, and so on” (Levin, 2008). There are many different people who are involved in the creation of a new curriculum or the revision of an old curriculum.
Before reading Levin’s article, I was unaware of how big of an impact politics played in the creation of a curriculum, and within education as a whole. Although I had never noticed the major political influence placed on different areas of academia, it makes sense considering how largely politics influence every aspect of our lives.
The curriculum itself is an example of public policy, as a way to push forward specific topics and lessons that select people deem important for students to learn. It surprises me how little influence current educators hold in the creation and implementation of the curriculum. The opinions of those in political power seem to hold more ground than those of anyone else when deciding what is to be deemed appropriate within education.
I noticed many different similarities between the Treaty Education document and the Levin article. The main connection would be that many different groups of people were involved in the creation and implementation of both of these curriculums. The major group involved in this process is the government, meaning that those with arguably the most experience and knowledge on the subject are being overlooked, while those in high political power are making all the decisions on behalf of the interest of all students. I can imagine that many Indigenous peoples did not agree with some of the points or goals included in the Treaty Education document, as it was created without very much input from an Indigenous person’s point of view.
References: