As Levin explains in his paper Curriculum policy and the politics of what should be learned in schools, “Curriculum decisions and choices are shaped in large measure by other considerations – ideology, personal values, issues in the public domain, and interests”. To begin, Levin offered a description of what curriculum is: “Curriculum is defined as an official statement of what students are expected to know and be able to do”. With this definition in mind, we are able to look into all of the considerations and inputs that the government and public has on policies. One of the quotes that stuck out to me was Lasswell’s definition of politics “Who gets what?”; furthermore, this means that the political world is all about power and this power means they must determine who gets what and who doesn’t receive their request. In terms of education and curriculum development, this means that in some cases there may be funds removed from this area to give more attention to a different area of government. Each of our elected governments are pressured and also constrained by many things including the voters preferences, the timing of the election, and the views of key interest groups. Levin goes on to explain that “When a government does something people do not like, whether popular or not, it tends to get labelled as ideology rather than political will”. This then means that every step a government takes is scrutinized by the public eye, so they must pick and choose which items they truly want to pass. Additionally, educational policy is under a higher watch due to the fact that the majority of the public has been through the education system. This then causes people to form strong opinions without a large understanding of how the education system and policies should be working. Furthermore, The preferences given by the public may not always align, for example, in education people may desire more testing and more creativity or thinking they want tougher standards and more individualization all at the same time. Governments must find a way to accommodate these inconsistencies in some way. The media also has a large influence on government policies, as things that are played up in the media, whether it’s true or accurate, must be addressed quickly by the government and may lead to a policy or plan created. 

There is also a belief that education policy should be based around the knowledge and experience of educators themselves. Unfortunately, as Levin explains “from a political perspective, however, evidence and experience are not enough to drive decisions, and they may be among the less important factors”. There are a lot of factors that go into curriculum politics due to the discussions surrounding what subjects should be included and the content that should go into those subjects. There is also increased interest for schools to be teaching students about types of social ills, bullying, equity, and many other societal interests. Oftentimes, people hold a belief that experts should be the creators of the curriculum; however, Levin explains why that isn’t the best idea. By using experts on a subject in the creation of curriculum a problem can arise. This problem is that the product may only be used by people with high levels of expertise, but most teachers will only have a limited background in that subject. I hadn’t given much thought to this previously, but what Levin is explaining makes complete sense. Teachers, especially those in elementary education, teach a variety of subjects which doesn’t allow for the expertise necessary to teach a curriculum created by experts on a subject. I previously thought that the creation of curriculum policies and education policies couldn’t be “that hard”, but after reading this article, I have realized that there are so many pieces that go into a slight change it seems impossible that curriculum reform and updates are even able to happen. There’s pressure from the government, experts, the public, and teachers which may not ever align with each other. It’s hard to choose who is “right” or what mix of ideas would make the best learning experience for students. 

In The Saskatchewan Way: Professional-Led Curriculum Development there was a lot of discussion about the best way for curriculum to be made, and contrary to Levin’s beliefs, the Saskatchewan way believes that curriculum success lies in the hands of teachers. As it was put in the article, “The success of curriculum reforms largely rests on the shoulders of teachers, since they are the ones who put reform ideas into practice … [and] successful implementation of reforms depends on teachers’ ownership of and their knowledge and reform ideas”. This explanation makes a lot of sense considering the curriculum is the tool that teachers use in their classrooms to guide almost every lesson. They go on to explain that the degree of success that a curricula reform has is dependent on how involved the teachers are. The collaboration between teachers and other professionals in the development of curriculum allows for teachers to visualize that curriculum isn’t simply a “decision made from above”, but instead that it is a dynamic and relevant document that holds value in their classroom.

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.

The Saskatchewan Way: Professional-Led Curriculum Development. Available on-line from: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FwQqfod6RqG_c73DP7a2kZGttSjDwghP/view