Provide a brief summary of your understanding of the three learning theories introduced in the readings (behaviourism, cognitivism, and constructivism). How can you connect these learning theories with the models of curriculum (product, process, and praxis in particular) that we have discussed?  What learning theories did you see reflected in your own schooling experiences?

Behaviourism, cognitivism, and constructivism are three common learning theories that provide varying ideas about how people best learn and acquire knowledge.

Behaviourism: A primary belief of Behaviourism is that “certain behavioural responses become associated in a mechanistic and invariant way with specific stimuli” (2.3 Objectivism and behaviourism). In other words, behaviours are wholly influenced by and are a product of external factors. Thus, in this sense, behaviour is measurable and observable. There is also an emphasis on shaping behaviour through positive and negative reinforcements or punishments to achieve specific outcomes. Behaviourism best connects with the product model of curriculum because, in this model, teachers expect students to achieve predetermined learning goals or behaviours. This is often done through explicit instruction, practice, and repetition, aiming to reinforce the learning. I experienced the Behaviourist theory of learning in elementary school when we would receive points for reading books. Once accumulated, students could redeem these points for rewards like candies or toys. There was also a field trip planned for the end of the year that we would only be able to attend if we gained over 25 points. In this instance, we were positively reinforced to read books and strengthen our literary skills. Continue reading “Blog Post 4 – Three Learning Theories” →

1. According to the Levin article, how are school curricula developed and implemented? What new information/perspectives does this reading provide about the development and implementation of school curriculum? Is there anything that surprises you or maybe that concerns you? 

According to the Levin article, the development of school curricula is heavily influenced by politics. As Levin states, “Every education policy decision can be seen as being, in some sense, a political decision” (Levin, p. 8). Further, he explains that a primary concern of the government is maintaining voter support to secure their position in the next election. Hence, a large portion of government actions are based on what the voters are calling for. In some instances, this is beneficial because, in a democracy, the government is ruled for and by the people. It should reflect what the citizens want. However, in the case of curricula development, I find allowing them to indirectly influence curricula with unprofessional opinions and beliefs concerning. Levin explains, “…everyone has gone to school, so just about everyone has a feeling of being knowledgeable and a personal response to educational issues. The same would not be true of health care or environmental pol­icy, or energy policy. People’s own school experience, whether primarily positive or negative, deeply affects their views about education pol­icy” (Levin, p. 15). Their curricular demands are mainly based on Continue reading “Blog Post 3 – Curriculum and Politics” →

According to commonsense, a “good” student is typically someone who conforms to the standards and expectations set by an educational institution. These standards and expectations often include obedience, punctuality, timely completion of assignments, stillness, and attentiveness, among many other things. A “good” student is expected to learn course material quickly and efficiently with minimal added help. Further, they will unquestioningly follow all rules and instructions laid out by their teachers. The commonsensical idea of a “good” student is strict and does not consider student distinctions.  Continue reading “Blog Post 2 – A “Good” Student” →

The following questions are based on Kevin Kumashiro’s “The Problem of Common Sense” in Against Common Sense: Teaching and Learning Toward Social Justice and Mark Smith’s “Curriculum Theory and Practice.” 

 1. How does Kumashiro define ‘commonsense?’ Why is it so important to pay attention to the ‘commonsense’?

Kumashiro defines ‘commonsense’ as the dominant beliefs and practices within a particular culture or society that have “become so routine and commonplace that they often go unquestioned.” Within schools, common sense depicts the way schools should be teaching and how students should act. It is closely tied to cultural and societal norms. Differing from these standards of teaching and doing is frequently seen as “abnormal, senseless, [and] even counterproductive.” It is crucial to pay attention to common sense because it is often exclusionary and oppressive, marginalizing those who do not fit into the dominant culture’s norms and expectations. For instance, schools may lack diverse materials, disciplines, and teaching methods due to the biases embedded in common sense. As a result, many students experience oppression which is “masked [….] in concepts that make us think this is the way things are supposed to be.” It allows for injustices to become both normalized and overlooked. Kumashiro suggests that by increasing the awareness of ‘commonsense’ within schools, educators can create more equitable and inclusive learning environments. Continue reading “Blog Post 1 – ‘Commonsense’ and Curriculum” →