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?

In the book, “Curriculum Policy and the Politics of What Should Be Learned in Schools” according Levin the curriculum is developed and implemented by the government. However, “political leadership will take account of expert opinion but, will inevitably take much interest in public opinion”. This means that the government can be influenced by people around them and by the public when developing the curriculum. When creating a new curriculum or revising a curriculum people from national, provincial, school advocators and sometimes even parents have influence on the curriculum and raise point of issues and add in their thoughts and ideas. When creating or revising the curriculum the ides of what goes into the curriculum, what subjects are in the curriculum, and how many hours/days it should be taught are discussed. However, the government has the over say in what goes into the curriculum.

One thing that surprises me was according to Levin “the latter may focus on the need for high level skills in their own areas, whereas teachers may be more concerned with a curriculum that will work for students with widely varying skills and interests”. To me the first part about this quotation sounds selfish. The second half of this quotation sounds like teachers are wanting the students to explore their interests and expand their skills. However, the part with the latter’s ideas is not ideal. “High level skills” in my opinion should not be included in the curriculum. Yes, schools should be encouraging students to do and explore what they like. But this seems to leave out many students and can possibly lead to being oppressive and harmful. This could leave out many students who do not fix into these ideals. And I believe that the curriculum should focus on the second half of this quotation.

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?

While reading “Treaty Education Outcomes and Indicators” I noticed on the first page of who contributed to the curriculum Sub-committee. While reading this I had noticed that like in Levin article he talked about the people who created the curriculum are national, local and school and how the curriculum is talked about in a group of people. In the “Treaty Education Outcomes and Indicators” document are national, local and school for example in the documents it states “The Ministry of Education and the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations”. The curriculum of treaty education is talked about in groups.