Curriculum Development

What should be learned in schools and who is making the decisions on this? This week we read two articles about curriculum and learning and how it is a complicated system and how Saskatchewan curriculums are out dated and in need of change, but the difficulties that arise from making change come down to some factors. Who will pilot the project? Who should be involved? How effective will the new material be to our students? How to implement going about the changes? and many more questions that will come along the way has affected what is in our curriculum. I used to think curriculum was simple, it was given to use by the government, and we follow what it says, teach it to our students, and get the job done! Some of our curriculum is outdated and has not been changed in years because of the challenges of peoples view points, how history has evolved, and what we now know. In our lecture we talked about the Social Studies curriculum and why it would be a huge obstacle to tackle and revamp. Although, I know that it has to be updated, I understand why it has not been yet and how it will be difficult to develop because of society’s opinions and what has taking place here in Canada is something many people are not willing to talk about.

In the article Curriculum Policy and Politics of What Should Be Learned in Schools, they talk about the two debates that take place while thinking about our curriculum and what politics are involved in the discussions. The first concern, they talk about is what subjects should take place in our education. An example they use is “whether literacy or mathematics are getting a sufficient share of the school day and year, whether sex education or religion should be part of the curriculum, when students should first study a foreign language, or degree to which they should be required to study music or physical education.” The second debate they are concerned with is over what content should be included in the subjects. Many people have their own beliefs of what should be included and what age you should learn about it. Some of the examples they use from their second debate questions are “How much of their own country’s history and geography should students learn as opposed to that of other countries? Should all students learn algebra? Should all students- or any- be required to study Shakespeare?” (Levin p.14). In addition to these areas of curriculum concerns teachers are also expected to teach about non-subject related matters. They teach about bullying, self-care, drugs/drinking abuse, obesity/anorexia and also promoting equality and eliminating racism in their instructions. The teachers are relied on heavily for guiding our youth, but do not have the most say in what is being put into the curriculum for learning. Overall, I don’t think what is in the curriculum is as big as a concern as how much time teachers have to teach what they are expected to teach. The public and government want teachers to help improve our children’s learning, but they are given more on their plate than what they can confidently tackle in a school year. Teachers are not only educators. We are caregivers, social workers, comfort zones, medical supports, etc.

It is concerning the lack of input teachers have in creating the curriculum. They are our front line workers and should be involved in the process of developing content that is necessary for our youth to learn. In the Saskatchewan way article, it was nice to see Saskatchewan have an active role in implementing teacher’s ideas and decisions along with government and experts to enhance student’s learnings and objectives. This statement stuck out to me while reading the article “while teacher involvement was intended to assist in making the new curriculum acceptable to students in the schools, it also had another effect. It allowed teachers to see curriculum as something dynamic and relevant, not an immutable imposition from above. The curriculum committees provided teachers with a mechanism to alter the course studies and gave them some confidence to undertake such changes” (p5). It is important to have freedom to go off course and provide different subject matters that may not be implemented in the curriculum, but what your class of students are curious about or what is important for them to learn in the safe space of your classroom.

             References

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. Available on-line from: http://www.corwin.com/upm-data/16905_Chapter_1.pdf.

The Saskatchewan Way: Professional-Led Curriculum Development. Available on-line from: https://www.stf.sk.ca/sites/default/files/the_saskatchewan_way_professional_led_curriculum_development.pdf