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.

 2. What type(s) of curriculum model did Kumashiro encounter in Nepal?

Kumashiro appears to have encountered the ‘Curriculum as a Syllabus’ model in Nepal. He explains that the curriculum model was very traditional, teacher-centered, and relied heavily on textbooks, lecture, rote memorization, and standardized testing. He states, “class lessons had always centered directly on the official textbooks, issued by the government.” Students received specific textbook-based lectures, questions, and tests. It also demonstrated the ‘Curriculum as a Product model.’ The teacher’s role was to transmit information to students and to facilitate their acquisition of predetermined learning outcomes. The model was rigid and inflexible, preventing student creativity and input. Students were all fed the same information and expected to regurgitate it to demonstrate their development. It was a very structured and planned approach to education with strict assessment criteria.

 3. What type(s) of curriculum model is the “commonsense” model in our Canadian school system? What might be the benefits and drawbacks to this model?

In the past, the “commonsense” model in our Canadian school system has shown similarities to Nepal’s curricular models. There was an emphasis on textbook usage, rote memorization, standardized testing, and strict assessment criteria. Despite their different needs and backgrounds, students were given the same instruction in hopes they would retain the same knowledge and skills. More recently, the Canadian school system’s “commonsense” has begun shifting away from these ideas and now focuses on the ‘Curriculum as a Process’ and ‘Curriculum as a Praxis’ models. The Curriculum as a Process model views curriculum as a dynamic process shaped by students’ diverse needs and interests. It allows for the curriculum to become a collaborative process that includes both the teachers and the students. Further, this means that the curriculum is constantly evolving to meet the changing needs of students and their society. Canadian educators are recognizing that students learn in different ways and are diversifying their forms of instruction, whether through group work, class discussions, or creative projects, for instance. The Curriculum as a Praxis model views curriculum as a transformative process to initiate social change and equity. The model is used as a tool to empower students to question existing power structures and fight modes of oppression. I have noticed that social justice education is being integrated more frequently into classroom teachings. However, it is essential to note that while the Canadian school system’s common sense shifts towards these newer models, many traditional norms remain structurally. For example, desks are often still in columns, the school year starts in the fall and ends before summer, and school occurs between approximately 9 AM and 3 PM. These happen unquestioningly.