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 personal ideologies and their own experiences as a student rather than facts, research, and professional experience. This was something I had not previously thought about. In addition, Levin explains that due to the immense power of politicians, a singular politician with high status could easily manipulate curricula to comply with their individual ideologies, which is also incredibly concerning. All of this further reminded me of the ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bills that have been gaining traction in the US. In many states, the bills ban LGBTQIA+ discussion and representation in schools and their curriculum. In Florida, it has become illegal. Due to the political ideologies of current Republican politicians as well as uneducated public discourse, many children are forced to attend schools that foster hostility and inequality. Children that are part of the community are marginalized and underrepresented. In this way, I think allowing the curriculum to be built on opinions, beliefs, and political gain can be destructive.
2. After reading pages 1-4 of the Treaty Education document, what connections can you make between the article and the implementation of Treaty Education in Saskatchewan? What tensions might you imagine were part of the development of the Treaty Education curriculum?
Levi’s article highlighted the importance of involving professional and unbiased individuals in the curriculum development process. He explains that the ulterior motives of politicians and the uneducated beliefs of the public can be detrimental to curricula. The Treaty Education document states that only two elders were involved in the Treaty Education curriculum development. The rest were people from various ministries and federations. To me, this indicates a lack of representation and thus, possible biases and inaccuracies.
Tensions may arise from the fact that the Treaty Education curriculum seems to have been poorly implemented. Throughout my elementary and high school years, I received very little treaty education up until grade 12, when I opted to take “Native Studies.” Upon taking this course, I finally began learning substantial information about treaties. Unfortunately, this course was optional, and few other students took it. I find it appalling that the only course that actually taught important treaty information was optional. A curriculum will never be successful if not properly implemented.
The above paragraphs draw from the following readings:
Levin, B. (2008). Curriculum policy and the politics of what should be learned in schools. In F. Connelly, M. He & J. Phillion (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of curriculum and instruction (pp. 7 – 24). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Pages 1-4 of Saskatchewan Treaty Education Outcomes and Indicators
Hi Hayleigh!
Our responses were similar in the sense that we are both concerned about how easily the curriculum can be influenced by unprofessional opinions and beliefs. You made a good point about how people’s individual experiences with school affect their views and beliefs on how it should be. This is something that I haven’t really considered either. The example of how LTGBQ2+ is banned and illegal in certain places, because of the government’s beliefs is a perfect example of this. I also did not know that only two Elders were included in the design of the Treaty Education curriculum. We also had similar experiences with Treaty Education, as I did not receive much learning until I got to highschool as well.
Amaya