Month: September 2021

When looking into what it means to be a “good” student according to the common sense, we see a lot of limitations. In general, a “good” student seems to be the complete opposite of M and N in the reading “Preparing Teachers for Crisis: A Sample Lesson” by Kumashiro. The idea of a “good” student comes from the fact that “mainstream society often places value on certain kinds of behaviours, knowledge, and skills” (Kumashiro, 2010, p. 22). This involves students “behaving and thinking in only certain ways” (Kumashiro, 2010, p. 21). A “good” student is one who is to always follow instructions and listen to the people who are seen as superior to them, such as the teacher. They do not challenge the mainstream approaches to learning that are being used in the classroom. When it comes to M and N, we see that they do not conform to these ideas of what it means to be a “good” student because rather they are seen as a stereotypical “bad” student. M is a student who would not participate in the scheduled class activities, struggled to listen, and would speak out of turn. These are all only seen as bad behaviours because of what society has set out to be the good behaviours in the traditional learning environment. This goes the same for N who often questioned why they learned the way they did or why the teacher taught a specific way. They had a different idea of what it meant to learn. There is also the idea that “good” students are associated with those who meet the expected learning goals and can show that they have reached these goals through the standardized method of assignments and tests. A “good” student will not hesitate to follow the traditional approach to learning that is set out for them, which includes lectures, note taking, assignments, and tests. With this said, “the closer a student got to saying the right things in the right ways, the higher that student’s grade would be” (Kumashiro, 2010, p. 21). They are also able to effectively use this method to understand new concepts and overall achieve good grades.

It is obvious that there are certain types of students who are privileged by this definition of a “good” student. We see that M and N are not privileged by this definition, being that they were unable or unwilling to be the students that society expected them to be. It is the students who are able to efficiently learn under these structured circumstances that are privileged by it, with these circumstances being those falling under the common sense understandings. These are the students who learn best with the traditional memorization method and who do not need any more than what they are being provided, meaning they are the students who learn as they are expected to. There seems to be a pressure on teachers “from schools and society to produce this type of student” (Kumashiro, 2010, p. 21). It is interesting to think about the idea that even if a student has excellent grades, they still might not experience privilege since being a “good” student in this case mainly depends on behaviour in regards to learning. Those who require or desire unique or different learning approaches are the ones who are typically seen as the “bad” students and will not be able to benefit like others can. In general, it can be observed that those students who are able to learn in these ways come from a privileged background where they are used to being exposed to the common sense. It benefits those students who are not oppressed in any way.

There are several ways in which the “good” student is shaped by historical factors. We are able to understand how we have come to this common sense understanding of a “good” student in the reading “A History of Education” by Painter. He describes the function of education in the past as being something in which “the processes of physical and mental growth must be assisted and directed during the formative periods of childhood and youth” (Painter, 1886, p. 2). The term directed is something that we see when it comes to a “good” student because they are the ones who are seen as being able to follow this strict direction method of learning. This is similar to the statement that “education is not creative” (Painter, 1886, p. 5). A “good” student is not associated with any forms of creativity being that they conform only to what they are told to do. When it comes to the end results of education within history, there seems to be a focus on preparing the students for a future that is already laid out for them, including things such as work. There was the idea that “education does not aim to develop a perfect man or woman, but to prepare its subjects for their place in the established order of things” (Painter, 1886, p. 9). With this comes the need of being good at listening and following instruction, much like we see within a “good” student. The traditional methods of learning and teaching is also a factor that can be seen as something that has historically shaped this idea of a “good” student. The students back then were seen as being good if they could learn something and then prove that they learned it, much like we see with this definition of a “good” student. We also learn that in the past, people endured oppression and did nothing to challenge it. This is still being seen today within the ways we think about learning as we look into what being a “good” student is all about.

References:

Kumashiro, K. (2010). Against Common Sense. Chapter 2- Preparing Teachers for Crisis: A Sample Lesson, pp. 19-33.

Painter, F. V. N. (1886). A History of Education, pp. 1-21.

I have always found the hidden curriculum to be an interesting topic when it comes to the many aspects of the curriculum in general, which is why I chose to look further into it. The article “Is the Hidden Curriculum a Relevant Issue in Educational Processes” by Patarroyo, Díaz, and Barreto de Quintero interested me because it talks about how the hidden curriculum can have positive or negative effects in education. They define the hidden curriculum as something that “refers to all the actions or situations developed in class unconsciously” (Díaz et al., 2004, p. 163). This is something that the students are never aware of because it includes behaviours that they learn through simply the experience of going to school. The article states that there are strategies that teachers can use to incorporate the hidden curriculum into their pedagogical strategies so that the benefits can be seen. Even though there are these problems highlighted within the hidden curriculum, it is still mentioned that it holds a lot of importance, being that it has a strong influence on student learning. This article talks about how “there are some specific social aspects highly affected by the hidden curriculum such as gender equality, social classes, racial differences and so on” (Díaz et al., 2004, p. 163). We often don’t even notice that these aspects are the products of the hidden curriculum and can affect how students approach their learning. These aspects also create problems for how students see each other, which in turn alters their behaviour towards others to be negative. The article specifically talks about how the hidden curriculum brings about ideas that complicate how students see gender differences, as seen in the example that “girls must behave better than boys” (Díaz et al., 2004, p. 164). These are typical issues that simply arise from the students just going through school without noticing what they are actually experiencing, apart from noticing the formal curriculum objectives.

With these issues arising from the hidden curriculum, the article explains some ways for the teacher to get around these. It is first necessary for the teachers to recognize when the hidden curriculum is causing negative effects on students. This will allow them to determine what actions are needed in order to guide the actions of a curriculum in a way. They must be careful how they approach this as to not be too demanding when they are addressing these things to the students. They want to instead address this in a way that is meaningful to the students and their thinking behaviours. The article recommends that in order to step away from stereotypical views of social skills, “they must make the hidden curriculum explicit to students” (Díaz et al., 2004, p. 164). This means that the students need the aspects of the hidden curriculum to be clear to them. These include observation techniques such as diaries, videos, peer modelling, and teacher modelling. This then allows the teachers to correct any negative patterns they see occurring from the hidden curriculum along the way. The other tool that they mention is the use of a portfolio, which allows students to collect all of their physical thinking and work. Through this they can see for themselves what areas they excel in and what areas may need some improving. I noticed that the observation method of approaching the hidden curriculum from a positive way has a focus on the teacher witnessing what the students are experiencing in the classroom, which doesn’t truly allow for the students to notice it. When looking at the portfolio method, I can see that this focuses on what the students notice in their behaviours from the hidden curriculum. Each method allows for the management of these issues that are considered to be of great relevance in teaching-learning processes, which results in a more efficient education.

As I move forward into examining the topic of the hidden curriculum for assignment one, there are some important next steps that I must take. I have to first find a couple more articles that tie into different aspects of the hidden curriculum. These must be readings that have a few connections with my first article, which could talk about the issues seen from a social standpoint or the things that teachers can do to allow for the hidden curriculum to have positive impacts. The readings must also differ from my first article so that I am able to broaden the overview of the hidden curriculum. This could include looking more into the positive benefits that it could have on students. Being that my first article covers the general idea of the hidden curriculum, I would need to find articles that go deeper into the impacts of both these positive and negative aspects of the hidden curriculum on the students’ lives and society. I have noticed that the hidden curriculum is something that I have not really heard about in the past, so I am wanting to do further research into the background of it and how it can be seen in the classroom. From here, I would have enough information on multiple areas of the topic in order to use all three pieces of reading to write my critical summary.

References:

Díaz, J., Patarroyo, E., & Barreto de Quintero, S. (2004). Is the Hidden Curriculum a Relevant Issue in Educational Processes. PROFILE Issues in Teachers’ Professional Development, 5(1), 162-165.

The Tyler rationale is an approach to curriculum theory and practice that has a primary focus on reaching an outcome and later evaluating if the outcome was attained. This is one of the many approaches to curriculum development that is found within the reading “Curriculum Theory and Practice” by Smith. It is a systematic process which places emphasis on the creation of behavioural objectives that can potentially be applied across all subjects. A clear idea of the outcomes are given “so that content and method may be organized and the results evaluated” (Smith, 1996, 2000, p. 4). Here we see a brief summary of the four fundamental questions that this theory is based on. This is still something that we can see being used in our education system today as we discussed in class. When I think back to my schooling, a major way in which I experienced the Tyler rationale was through the use of departmental exams. These exams serve as the main form of assessment to ensure that students learn everything they were supposed to over the course of the whole school year. Being that throughout different schools in Saskatchewan, all students take the exact same test at the exact same time as to show how strict the outcomes were. I found that most of my science and math classes involved the teachers always prioritizing our success on the final departmental exam. The lessons were oriented around only material that would be on the departmental exam and no extra material was given. I was also always evaluated during the middle of the school year by completing tests that would show what I knew and what I didn’t understand. We would rarely focus on problems that students got wrong because we had to move on to the next topic in order to meet all the objectives. Another school experience that I had regarding the Tyler rationale is the multiple classes where I didn’t really have the ability to learn on my own. There were times when I felt that the classes were too guided and I was barely even given the opportunity to ask myself questions.

There are quite a few limitations of the Tyler rationale being that it can make some important aspects of education impossible. It is a very traditional approach to the curriculum. A major problem with this approach is the fact that the students have basically no freedom and “can end up with little or no voice” (Smith, 1996, 2000, p. 4). This is because, with a focus on getting the students to reach the final objective, they are told how they must learn which leads to them not getting the opportunity to truly engage in their own experiences in education. This limits the ability of all students to learn in ways that best suit them, meaning that it might benefit those who learn best under the given circumstances but those who require a different way of learning will have a hard time succeeding. In seeing this, it is also clear that the teachers have no say in the matter being that it takes away their influence since it is intended to be a “teacher proof” curriculum. Their freedom is taken away when it comes to their creativity of forming a classroom that they believe will most benefit the students. Another problem with this occurs when the idea of measuring learning comes into play, being that this is the center of the approach. This can become difficult because we don’t always see the results of learning immediately, especially when it comes to skills which take time to build. It can also be hard to measure the wide range of learning that can take place in a classroom under the restrictions of this model. Then comes the fact that the Tyler rationale limits the ability for both students and teachers to recognize learning that might not be a part of the set objective, making it impossible for them to see growth in other areas. They will instead only have a focus on trying to improve in ways that regard the outcomes that are expected, leaving them with seeing no importance in any other skills.

This approach can also lead to some potential benefits, making some important things possible to accomplish. There is mention that “the attraction of this way of approaching curriculum theory and practice is that it is systematic and has considerable organizing power” (Smith, 1996, 2000, p. 4). This is something I can agree with being that teachers often strive for organization in their classroom. With the general benefit of this approach being organization, it allows for clear and ordered instructions which can benefit student learning. It can also potentially be good for the students and teacher to see exactly what they will be doing since it does provide them with a focus point. There would not be any confusion in what the teacher must teach or how they must teach it with this model, meaning it makes it easy for teachers to create lesson plans. There are also possible benefits that come about with the idea of bringing change into the students behaviour since it could be for the better, potentially shifting them out of past learning habits that might not have worked for them, and instead showing them this model which could make learning easier for them. 

References:

Smith, M. K. (1996, 2000) ‘Curriculum theory and practice’ The encyclopedia of informal education, www.infed.org/biblio/b-curric.htm.

Within the reading “The Problem of Common Sense” by Kumashiro, he has a very interesting way of defining common sense and he raises some excellent points. He starts off by saying that common sense is basically what everyone’s expected to know or should know. These are the ways that we traditionally think about certain things, such as teaching and learning. Kumashiro explains that common sense is typically just accepted and very specific to a place, as we can see when he explains the difference between his experiences in Nepal compared to the United States when it comes to schooling and life in general. During his teaching experience in Nepal, he got to see how common sense works and more specifically, how it can cause issues in the school system. There were all these new teaching styles that Kumashiro brought with him, but common sense was preventing the students from wanting to accept these new and different methods. He soon recognized that there was a problem occurring with this idea of common sense due to the fact that it makes us fear change, being that we often find comfort in the traditional ways. Another interesting comment that he makes is that common sense can limit us. He explains how common sense doesn’t tell us what we could be doing because instead, it tells us what we should be doing. There are also instances where he describes common sense within the school system as something that makes it easy to use methods that allow oppression to continue without being questioned. When considering all of these different sides of Kumashiro’s definition of common sense, we can see his big idea that focuses on how common sense should not shape these aspects of education, being that instead this is what we must look deeper into so that it can finally be challenged.

There are many reasons why it is so important to pay attention to common sense. A majority of us do not even realize that there is this common sense in our lives because we are just used to it. This makes it hard to notice, but when we do pay attention to it, we can find ways to produce benefits. The main importance is that what may seem to be common sense to someone could be totally new to others. In this way it allows us to learn about other people’s experiences similarly to how Kumashiro learns about the unique ways of life in Nepal that they take for granted. When we pay attention to this, it allows us to raise questions about how effective the common sense ways are. It also gives us the ability to challenge it and step away from the traditional ways that we have become so accustomed to. If we continue to brush off this idea of common sense, we will become stuck in a world of repetition. When we specifically consider common sense within teaching and learning, we see that people tend to stick to the same routine and methods, but when we recognize this, it allows for us to consider other options that can potentially have greater benefits for everyone involved. As Kumashiro mentions, common sense can often lead to oppression being continued within schools and society. If we recognize the importance of paying attention to the common sense, we can address the things that are causing this inequality. If we all pay attention to the common sense surrounding us, it will overall allow for new experiences to arise within ourselves as individuals and society as a whole.

I have many common sense understandings of curriculum and pedagogy that all come from my previous experiences in school. When it comes to the curriculum, I have always understood it to simply be a document that teachers read to know what content has to be taught. It is typically seen as something that has to be strictly followed, as my past teachers would say. I have come to know the curriculum as being the reason that we must rush while learning new concepts or why we don’t have time for experiments and other activities. This was simply because the common sense understanding of the curriculum was that it contained a large amount of content that teachers had to teach in a school year, meaning there was not enough time for anything truly engaging. There are also many common sense understandings of pedagogy that I have come to know based on previous teaching styles that I have come across. I have had a majority of my teachers use the lecture, notes, assignment, test approach so that is just what I have come to expect when entering a new class. With this comes the memorization aspect that became a regular part of every class in my past years of school as well. Another common sense understanding that has to do with pedagogy is homework. This is something that I was just used to getting in school so it just became routine in my life. These common sense understandings that I bring into this class are probably similar to my peers, being that they seemed to be traditional within our education system. Now as I continue forward, I am able to understand how we tend to become stuck in these traditions and why it is so important for us to challenge them in order to benefit everyone.

References:

Kumashiro. (2009). Against Common Sense: Teaching and Learning Toward Social Justice, pp. XXIX – XLI.